I have to say I'm pretty impressed. I guess now that they have all the fundamental technology stuff mostly worked out they can make rapid progress on the gameplay systems.

I'm interested to see how this scales when a bazillion people are playing, but it really does look good. That atmospheric entry was a really cool touch.

And yes, dialing AA to FXAA and reducing or turning off ambient occlusion makes an incredible difference in all the rigs I've seen.

I got a pretty big boost setting "Maximum pre-rendered frames" to 1 in the nvidia control panel too. Smoothed out a ton of chopiness.

Creston wrote on Dec 8, 2013, 16:06:
For a cosmological instant, yes. The entire point of a black hole is that it doesn't allow for stable orbits. Everything eventually gets sucked in.

Admittedly, the blurb doesn't say that the planets have a stable orbit, so perhaps they are on a course to being sucked in.

This is absolutely not correct. A quick google search would have given you the correct answer. Any orbit stable for any large body is also stable for a black hole.

Here's a good starting point:

"Is there any stable orbit around a black hole?"

Flatline wrote on Oct 15, 2013, 03:38:
Integrating FPS into a space sim game is mostly cosmetic?

Yes, when the engine they are using gives you that practically for free its mostly cosmetic. They pretty much only need to come up with the art assets and they get the FPS. I assume you have the hanger? How is that not an FPS? The only thing missing is "pew pew" because you don't happen to have a gun on your character model and you have nothing to shoot. So I personally don't see the FPS stuff being an issue at all. If you buy the buggy you even get an extra part of your hanger that has a little obstacle course to cruise around in. Because it was simple to add.

Here's an interesting thread on the engine:

A reminder of what the Cryengine can do for Star Citizen


Anyway, if folks have serious doubts and don't think its going to be good, then don't spend the money, yay. Obviously $22+ million disagree with that opinion and time will tell if it was justified or not. I think its good either way, personally. If this works out it shows how much crowdsourcing is the better model, and if it does not then it shows how much it's broken. I personally hope it totally works out because then companies like EA will be going away and the end users will be the ones to decide what is worth making and what is valuable.

CJ_Parker wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 19:47:

Scottso wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 19:16:
I don't think that's altogether fair considering Robert's past history with these sorts of games.

Oh yeah?

Yeah. So right up until Freelancer he was kicking ass with amazing games that defined the genre. One project with problems and "OMG WHAT A CLUSTERFUCK!" Besides, MS bought up Digital Anvil right when all these "problems" were happening. That's when he became a "consultant." Big paycheck doesn't seem like that much of a clusterfuck to me. Despite all that, it came out just fine and people remember it quite fondly even after they removed some of the really ambitious features to push it out quickly.

I think the scope of Star Citizen is just about right. All "new" features are down to simple cosmetic things. Even the last big stretch goal was technology to put real peoples' faces on characters/npcs instead of promising some potentially out of reach game feature. It would seem to me they are pretty clear and focused on the base game now. $22+ million is a LOT of money, especially if you don't have to pay anyone except your dev team and rent an office. 50 developers, which is a lot, at $100K a year (lets say including insurance, 401K etc.) you will lay out $5 million, so $10 million for a 2 year dev cycle to release. The other $12+ million you have on hand is quite a lot of padding without counting how much you rake in after you release, assuming its even modestly successful. Especially if you are making interest on it. There are no investors to pay off with money. You're paying them off by making a game they want to play.

In any case, time will tell. I'm sure it will be be impossible to meet some of the crazy expectations that always revolve around these sorts of things, but the fact that they have multiple development teams working on separate modular pieces seems to be built in insurance. Assuming they get the space combat stuff out and its fun, everything else is just a piece they can refine and add as it's ready. That model already works (see Eve Online.) To be honest, in general, I am just as skeptical as you are, but in this case I don't see anything really that unreasonable.

I also have to admit, although its relatively simple stuff, imo the hangar is pretty impressive. Especially if you have some of the larger ships in it. It definitely makes you want to see these things flying in space and if they keep paying attention to player/backer input like they have, I think it has the potential to be one of those games you just have to play "for one more hour."

Sorry to be the lone optimist in this thread.

Creston wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 18:35:

Sleep wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 14:36:

Creston wrote on Oct 14, 2013, 13:41:
Up next: RTS gameplay, and at 25 million we make it into an RPG! Then, at 30 million, it'll become Angry Birds: Star Citizen!

They need to stop adding things to it. Few wing commander fans wanted FPS gameplay in this game, and just continuously adding features will only dilute the experience.

They took a vote on whether to stop adding things. Turns out 87% didnt agree with you.

Well, I hope that 87% will enjoy playing Call of Angry Wing Duty Effect...

Though if it turns out to be the most awesome Call of Angry Wing Duty Effect ever, I'll be very happy.

I don't think that's altogether fair considering Robert's past history with these sorts of games. I think it would be fair to say, if you liked Freespace and Wing Commander back in the day, this will be at the very least those games with frills, but I'm betting on it being in the spirit of those older games with so much more of their potential filled out. Based on the current dollars people are throwing at this I doubt I'm alone in that line of thought.

The only way I could see this truly going poorly is if it's a bug infested mess for a long time after release, but the modular design certainly makes that far more manageable.

I suspect a lot of folks are also not realizing/remembering that much of the main gameplay design work was already very well fleshed out and planned long before the kickstarter took off. The original plan was to go the traditional investor/publisher route which implies there was something fleshed out enough and realistic to show to investors.

This is a 70's style documentary. Its a riff off of the 70's show In Search Of... which was narrated by Leonard Nimoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCDD76JXLKk

Yeah. I backed it so I hope its good.

Basically its not better than Mech Warrior Online or Planet Side 2, so imho its doomed. Those two games target both halves of the majority of folks that would play Hawken. It has giant robots but doesn't have the heavy weight feel of giant robots. It has the crazy fast pace of modern FPS but you're in a giant target/robot. It also doesn't have anything to distinguish itself from the aforementioned games. Its just Quake with giant robot skins, imho. Just not for me.

Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Mar 19, 2012, 22:08:
It didn't help that they borrowed the same narrative structure (find four macguffins to stop an ancient evil) and characters (Aribeth and Bastila are the same fucking character) from NWN. In fact, that reuse of characters and plot structure from game to game has come to define everything Bioware has done post-BG2.

Bioware is the KING of reuse. Including the stuff you mentioned, every game they make reuses exactly the same pre-fab areas over and over all the way from Mass Effect to SWTOR. That was always a HUGE pet peeve of mine. Nothing like discovering a new area that is... not new at all.

WyldKat wrote on Nov 8, 2011, 02:14:
Yep. SOE and Bioware didn't pay anywhere NEAR $50 million COMBINED for the Star Wars IP for their respective MMOs either.

I would add that a smart Interplay would have negotiated some cut of MMO income and been happy they don't have to actually risk anything. Instead greedy Interplay is going to be bankrupt. Welcome to capitalism.

Jerykk wrote on Nov 8, 2011, 02:28:

When you can take something like Mass Effect and turn it into Deer Hunter over a couple of sequels and still make your sales figures, that about says it all.

That's a bit of an exaggeration. Mass Effect was never much of an RPG to begin with. You couldn't sneak or talk your way through the game and the game as a whole was pretty linear. It was, above all else, a shooter. Granted, Mass Effect 2 dumbed down some of the RPG elements but again, the first game wasn't exactly a hardcore CRPG to begin with.

Back on topic, I'm not terribly surprised that the new game is going to be post-apocalyptic. A bit disappointing but I'm interested to see Bioware's take on the setting.

Not that I disagree with your general point or anything. I just thought your example was faulty.

I understand where you are coming from, however I would argue that Mass Effect was far more of a role-playing game than it's sequel(s). While the first one definitely catered to the FPS crowd, the true charm of it was that it also catered to the RPG crowd. Just because it was linear doesn't mean it wasn't an RPG. Your assumption that linearity has something to do with whether a game is an RPG or a FPS is flawed. There are a bazillion (technical term) RPGs that are very linear whether it be invisible walls or a dungeon that has visible ones in the history of RPGs.

finga wrote on Nov 8, 2011, 00:10:

wtf_man wrote on Nov 7, 2011, 22:39:
They're making a new "RPG"... without character creation... without dialog choices... without experience points... without skills... without leveling... without magic... without melee... without quests... without story... must be purchased on Origin... AND most importantly... can't use a keyboard and mouse (must use gamepad to mash the "A-Button-Does-Something-Awesome" )

... And it's going to be called... "Mass Age of Defective Dragons 13: Not Another console Sequel... Really!"

Oh... and you get 1 hour of Game for $60... and have to buy 35 different DLC's at $29 a pop, that are about 20 minutes of add-on, before you get a full game.

someone's gettin' mad at video games.

With every right to be, IMO. Its just about down to the least common denominator now. Idiocracy was a very prescient movie. When you can take something like Mass Effect and turn it into Deer Hunter over a couple of sequels and still make your sales figures, that about says it all.

Is it just me or when you hear a game going "free to play" you automatically think, "well they must be desperate since they couldn't get enough people to pay a monthly subscription."

I always find it amazing when they still make enough money to stay in business after going the f2p route. In my opinion its because the game was NOT good enough to bring people in to pay subscriptions fees, but marginally good enough to get a few players suckered in by offering the bare minimum for free and then offering them "cheats" if they pay a few cents on the dollar.

Brilliant from a business perspective. Bad news for people who like to think they are playing a game where they can compete on their skill and experience irregardless of how much disposable income they have.

If there was ever a developer/company that deserved dollars this is the one. They've even one-upped Stardock in taking care of the customer, imho, which is pretty amazing. Companies like this (Stardock would certainly qualify as well) are what will eventually, if they haven't already, influence the likes of EA. They are more like indie developers than these big money grab corps and they are very much tuned into what their customers really want. Good for them. I'll support them with my expendable income and they are certainly earning my trust for pre-order deals.

StingingVelvet wrote on Dec 16, 2010, 22:13:

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Dec 16, 2010, 22:05:

StingingVelvet wrote on Dec 16, 2010, 21:28:
I actually just now, yesterday, for the first time, started playing WoW. It sucks as a game, I hate it, but I keep playing it.

So basically you are one of potentially millions of people who need some sort of WAA, congratulations! (WoW Addicts Anonymous, for the acronym challenged.) Their drug is still working, Blizzard has to be pleased.

It's amazing how every facet of the game is designed to be addictive and time consuming. I don't think I will fall for it to the extent of actually paying for it... at least, I hope I don't.

All this should make everyone scared of the next game. They've had plenty of time to perfect the drug....

D_K_night wrote on Sep 18, 2010, 03:48:

Scottso wrote on Sep 17, 2010, 23:29:
For what it's worth, it's really easy to get a refund. Coming here complaining that you should have bought Civ 5 instead is kind of disingenuous since you CAN get a refund on Elemental. Let's see you get one if you decide you hate Civ 5...

How? Tell us how you can get such a refund. You can't return opened software. EBgames/Gamestop won't take back PC games used.

People got screwed huge, months later this game still isn't playable with the FULL feature set it promised upon release.

Did you actually buy it from one of those places? I only ask because one of the biggest complaints was that it was hardly available on store shelves, only directly from Stardock.

That said, it's not hard to go to their site and learn how to get a refund. If you can't be bothered to find out on your own then I'm not going to hold your hand. Perhaps you are one of those people who post "their opinion" when they didn't even actually buy the game?

Mind you I'm just as disappointed as everyone else at how it ended up being released and I'm hardly a fanboy. I'm just pointing out the fact that Stardock has always been, in my experience, accommodating and they will take care of you if you bother to take it up with them instead of random whining on random forums. But I understand why expecting a bit of effort might be asking too much from some.

For what it's worth, it's really easy to get a refund. Coming here complaining that you should have bought Civ 5 instead is kind of disingenuous since you CAN get a refund on Elemental. Let's see you get one if you decide you hate Civ 5...

Sorry to hear about this. My dad died from oral cancer last January caused from smoking a pipe for 40 years, and your description of how your dad avoided hospitals and doctors struck a chord. My dad did the same thing and that is likely why he died from it. He thought "it's just a sore throat," and then it never went away...

I find the comments about EVE pretty funny. If you manage to get past the learning curve, which I admit can be a bit intimidating, it's actually a really fun game that requires a lot of tactics and strategy, especially if you fly in small gangs (which is what I prefer.) While it's certainly not a twitch game, combat can be fast and furious and fights rarely last more than a few minutes. You have to think and react fast to survive.

Fitting out ships is like a mini-game on it's own.

The UI is certainly clunky and garners the most complaints, but it's serviceable for how the game is played. Hopefully they will focus on it at some point and make it more user friendly.

Anyway, my take is from a PVP small-gang perspective. There really are so many ways to play the game that everyone's experience will be completely different. Which is probably one of the reasons EVE isn't more popular. It takes a long time to get a handle on it.