CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 16, 2016, 09:53:

jdreyer wrote on Jan 16, 2016, 02:52:

KS wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 18:19:
Here, I wait. I want to know what the gameplay is. Pure PvP?

There's a persistent universe that should play similarly to E:D, but on a smaller scale and with full individual FPS.

A minor correction here since I'm not sure what you mean by "full individual FPS" but FPS will not be enabled fully in the game. There will be FPS-enabled zones like back-alleys or certain contested space stations and so on. FPS will also be enabled in boarding situations.
But that's it. You will be able to go about your business unmolested in regular space ports.

As for PvP in space it is determined by a matchmaking slider. You have the option to control your likelihood of a PvP encounter via that slider from very likely to least likely. The game will then rather randomly throw you into PvP encounters depending on your preference and depending on what area/instance you are in and depending on the people in your surroundings and their preferences or slider settings.
So, yeah, space has non-consensual PvP (which is fucking retarded if you ask me but OK... let Christ Roberts find out the hard way if that is his wish...).

By FPS I mean that you can get out of your ship, in First Person, walk around the environments like space stations, pick up guns, and Shoot them. Can't do that in Elite.

CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 16, 2016, 11:37:
Nope. All I want is for them to be fucking HONEST for once and for Christ Roberts to stop spreading bullshit lies like in that Gamescom interview.
There is no way he actually believed what he was saying there unless he really is either completely fucking retarded or is on drugs. Seriously.

CIG has set numerous estimates for release since the original pitch which were made with the best intentions.

CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 16, 2016, 11:37:
Also, I do think that the level of "fidelity" they are aiming for with the initial release is completely unnecessary and overblown. That's what expansions and continual development are for as with most crowdfunded games or MMOs.

There is absolutely no reason to hold everything back for the mythical huge commercial launch with the 100 star systems which we know probably will not happen within the next two/three/more years.

Look at Wasteland 2 Director's Cut or Divinity Original Sin 2 Enhanced Edition or any MMO. Games do not have to be absolutely perfect at release. A lot of the fluff CIG is adding is unnecessarily expanding the dev time for diminishing returns. There is a lot of mostly cosmetic "fidelity-enhancing" work they are doing now that they might as well have scheduled for future (free) add-ons/expansions/patches.

You can't overhaul the entire engine and the fidelity of the assets in an expansion - that's just nonsense and you know it. There's no way they could have updated the ships to the current quality after-the-fact. I backed a AAA game based on the CryEngine, not a crappy indie game like Wasteland 2 (which I also backed and regret).

CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 16, 2016, 11:37:
Everyone does and most crowdfunded games have seen delays, no big deal. A great game does not necessarily need to have the maximum feature set at launch (again see WL2 DC or D:OS EE). CIG should have gone through their list of stretch goals and checked out what they promised for launch (like the 100 star systems) and what they promised for later and then schedule stuff accordingly.

Most of the stretch goals AREN'T being prioritised for launch. There's no work on the tablet companion, pets, etc. The rest are content that can be developed in parallel to the rest of the game, like new ships and star systems. The ship development is clearly not slowing down the game - working on the engine and netcode have been the biggest obstacles. FPS was outsourced and only brought back in-house when the studio had expanded to enough staff. I just don't get where all these stretch goals are that are supposedly slowing down the game.

CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 16, 2016, 11:37:
What I am missing is their focus on an actual release. They are drifting along, randomly fulfilling some stretch goals and some features from the initial pitch but there is no real push towards a commercial product (except with S42 this year hopefully but even that remains to be seen). It is lacking a clear vision, a clear direction and "tightness".

They're allocating resources to where they're needed. Numerous times we've seen staff working on ships redirected to Squadron 42 to prioritise ships needed for the main game. The stretch goals are NOT a priority. Take the Banu Merchantman, for instance - that was promised back at the $27m market in 2013 but hasn't been worked on because the mechanics weren't in place (cargo, multi-crew ships, 64-bit precision, etc). In the meantime we've had numerous unrelated ships completed and released because they were possible to implement with the existing mechanics (i.e. combat), like the P-52 Merlin, Vanguard, etc. The Sabre is close behind because it uses a lot of the same assets as the Vanguard and the Reliant is close behind, even though other ships pre-date them.

But yes, I agree that CIG needs to do a lot more to prioritise playable content over flashy presentations. We don't even have a single complete star systems yet and we're missing basic mechanics, like currency, cargo, persistence, etc. Arena Commander still has the same two maps and one racing location from launch. CIG needs to realise that they have to have a playable and evolving game while they're developing all the fancy upcoming stuff. I have some serious doubts about Squadron 42 releasing this year. Don't mistake me for someone who blindly defends everything about the game.

harlock wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 23:47:
thing is - all these people sitting back and watching how it fails, why it fails, and so forth... they are gonna get really smart and creative, then in the next 5 years or so you are gonna have a handful of "star citizen killers" come along and they are just going to eat christ roberts lunch whole.. just gobble the whole thing up while he sits there dreaming about more bullshit he will never be able to pull off

mark my words

So in five years time there will be several $100m+ games that put Star Citizen to shame? Firstly, that's not going to happen. Secondly, that's great for gamers - I can't wait. Before SC there was zero interest from developers / publishers, with only the shockingly bad X-series of games to choose from - since then we've had Elite Dangerous and we're soon to have EVE: Valkyrie.

Star Citizen has been going from strength to strength, so I have no idea where you get the idea it's failing - wishing something doesn't make it so, as I've wished many times that you would be a reasonable person. But I hope you're right that there will be numerous games that surpass Star Citizen, because that's great for everybody.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 16, 2016, 11:08:
Do you want them to rush it and deliver an inferior product? I ask because that seems to be exactly what you're saying.

Nope. All I want is for them to be fucking HONEST for once and for Christ Roberts to stop spreading bullshit lies like in that Gamescom interview.
There is no way he actually believed what he was saying there unless he really is either completely fucking retarded or is on drugs. Seriously.

Also, I do think that the level of "fidelity" they are aiming for with the initial release is completely unnecessary and overblown. That's what expansions and continual development are for as with most crowdfunded games or MMOs.

There is absolutely no reason to hold everything back for the mythical huge commercial launch with the 100 star systems which we know probably will not happen within the next two/three/more years.

Look at Wasteland 2 Director's Cut or Divinity Original Sin 2 Enhanced Edition or any MMO. Games do not have to be absolutely perfect at release. A lot of the fluff CIG is adding is unnecessarily expanding the dev time for diminishing returns. There is a lot of mostly cosmetic "fidelity-enhancing" work they are doing now that they might as well have scheduled for future (free) add-ons/expansions/patches.

I'd rather have a great game I can play for years than a rushed game that meets an arbitrary estimate made early in development.

Everyone does and most crowdfunded games have seen delays, no big deal. A great game does not necessarily need to have the maximum feature set at launch (again see WL2 DC or D:OS EE). CIG should have gone through their list of stretch goals and checked out what they promised for launch (like the 100 star systems) and what they promised for later and then schedule stuff accordingly.
My personal impression with how they run things is that no one has ever revisited the original feature list or stretch goal list since 2012/2013.

What I am missing is their focus on an actual release. They are drifting along, randomly fulfilling some stretch goals and some features from the initial pitch but there is no real push towards a commercial product (except with S42 this year hopefully but even that remains to be seen). It is lacking a clear vision, a clear direction and "tightness".

CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 19:49:
This is nonsense and you putting your own spin on it because CIG can not do wrong in your eyes. Several staff from CIG have stated repeatedly in AtV (and other media) that they were very happy with the work done by Illfonic. Travis Day himself said back in the day that his on-site stay at Illfonic had nothing to do with quality issues but that it was business as usual.

Cut the bullshit. CIG is to blame for outsourcing the FPS development to a studio with no credibility and for not ensuring that they were on track. They should have taken it in-house much sooner, though I suspect the issue related to legal contracts. And there's plenty of other areas I'm highly critical of CIG, like announcing delays when they're patently obvious (the S42 reveal had a new release date just a month or two before it was due). I've spoken to Erin Roberts in person about Illfonic and the impression I got was that they were happy to be rid of them and take development in-house. Some of the monthly reports allude to issues with Illfonic's implementation of mechanics, like EVA.

CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 19:49:
LOL what a bunch of fabricated bullshit as always from you. They promised 100 systems AT LAUNCH (look it up ... $6m "Star Citizen will launch with 100 star systems").
Chris Roberts said in this video from Gamescom 2015 "... and then towards the end of 2016 we're hoping to have the full persistent universe working and functioning".
You know, full persistent universe as in 100 star systems and all promised ships and every single gameplay system by the end of this year. What else is the FULL persistent universe? Let me hear what spin you're going to put on this one. Should be good for a laugh...

CIG didn't say that Star Citizen would launch at the end of 2016, only that the PU should be functional by then. It's already playable now in a basic form and should be fleshed out considerably over the coming year. Also, I pointed out that CIG has already stated that star systems are going to be added discreetly over time because they don't want players to go around and discover them all immediately, particularly if there are balance issues or exploits (i.e. one of two people can discover where all the star systems are an unlock them immediately).

Do I think they're going to have 100 star systems in place by the end of 2016? Nope. Do I think all the major gameplay elements will be in place by then? Nope. But the point is that the PU is playable now in a basic form and will continue to be expanded on over the coming years. Nobody wants delays but what people are getting is infinitely better than what was originally pitched. The damage system, the facial technology, DX12, the manual landing on planets, the fidelity - it's all far beyond what people were expecting. Do you want them to rush it and deliver an inferior product? I ask because that seems to be exactly what you're saying. I'd rather have a great game I can play for years than a rushed game that meets an arbitrary estimate made early in development.

As for anyone unsure of whether to get the game, simply wait for the next free fly weekend. At the moment it's really only for the fans, the people willing to put up with a lot of performance issues, gameplay problems and bugs and for those willing to report them through the Issue Council. It's not even close to the standard of a released game, nor is anyone claiming that it is. All I would say is that there's a lot of fun to be had and it's improving at quite a rapid pace now. Check it out later in the year.

Just game wise the 2.1 is quite a bit more stable than 2.0 I managed to fly with a friend for couple of hours and CTD happened around 3h mark.

Still random bugs like ship repairing sometimes killing you, occasional ejections.

No slowdowns anymore due to AI pirate spawning (or whatever the issue was before).

I did my share of hopping onto other player ships to copilot, turret them, but nothing much to do there atm.


Turrets are still pretty unusable. While pilot can see pirates easily on overview in turrets you just see green targets. on some ships you can cycle and see in status window who you are targeting. in some ships it does not work.

Super Hornet turret is still super slow to turn, so completely unusable.

Doing the Covalex "glowing pad hunt" mission together shows the other guy twitching around in EVA mode.

Arena Commander supposedly took a dive for the worst with people crashing quite often.

So in summary: PU is better, but nothing to get much invested in yet. probably will take another few hour look when 2.2 hits live.

jdreyer wrote on Jan 16, 2016, 02:52:

KS wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 18:19:
Here, I wait. I want to know what the gameplay is. Pure PvP?

There's a persistent universe that should play similarly to E:D, but on a smaller scale and with full individual FPS.

A minor correction here since I'm not sure what you mean by "full individual FPS" but FPS will not be enabled fully in the game. There will be FPS-enabled zones like back-alleys or certain contested space stations and so on. FPS will also be enabled in boarding situations.
But that's it. You will be able to go about your business unmolested in regular space ports.

As for PvP in space it is determined by a matchmaking slider. You have the option to control your likelihood of a PvP encounter via that slider from very likely to least likely. The game will then rather randomly throw you into PvP encounters depending on your preference and depending on what area/instance you are in and depending on the people in your surroundings and their preferences or slider settings.
So, yeah, space has non-consensual PvP (which is fucking retarded if you ask me but OK... let Christ Roberts find out the hard way if that is his wish...).

KS wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 18:19:
Here, I wait. I want to know what the gameplay is. Pure PvP?

There's a persistent universe that should play similarly to E:D, but on a smaller scale and with full individual FPS. There's also a full SP campaign, a la the old Wing Commander series.

thing is - all these people sitting back and watching how it fails, why it fails, and so forth... they are gonna get really smart and creative, then in the next 5 years or so you are gonna have a handful of "star citizen killers" come along and they are just going to eat christ roberts lunch whole.. just gobble the whole thing up while he sits there dreaming about more bullshit he will never be able to pull off

mark my words

KS wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 18:19:
Here, I wait. I want to know what the gameplay is. Pure PvP?

CR's ambition is to make the biggest game ever. a universe simulator. by my estimation it will take them 2 more years to reach the beginning of that point, and 10 more years to finish it. you can PVP in it already because that's easy to implement.

loomy wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 17:42:

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 16:32:
is there a game worth buying yet?

NO. There are a few quests and that's it. More than people know, because they talk without playing it. I've spent a few hours playing. But it's not a whole game yet. It is like a DayZ alpha type of situation where everyone has their fun running around in the wild west.

That said, if anyone wanted a deal, they needed to buy the sale packages that just went by. The price of the game is probably going to double now.

Thanks, then I'll most likely be holding off this year, especially if the price goes up. I refuse to buy a ship or pay for anything over what the base game offers.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 15:28:
It was delayed. CIG outsourced development to Illfonic, a company that had little experience - that resulted in serious delays and substandard work. Last year CIG took development in-house and started to rework it. However, it's possible to try FPS combat now by flying to the security outpost and grabbing one of the weapons. A full fledged Star Marine release will come later.

This is nonsense and you putting your own spin on it because CIG can not do wrong in your eyes. Several staff from CIG have stated repeatedly in AtV (and other media) that they were very happy with the work done by Illfonic. Travis Day himself said back in the day that his on-site stay at Illfonic had nothing to do with quality issues but that it was business as usual.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 15:28:
Nonsense. No firm release date has been given to the PU, plus it was never stated that all systems would be immediately accessible - in fact a large part of the gameplay is discovering new systems, which will be added over time without warning.

LOL what a bunch of fabricated bullshit as always from you. They promised 100 systems AT LAUNCH (look it up ... $6m "Star Citizen will launch with 100 star systems").
Chris Roberts said in this video from Gamescom 2015 "... and then towards the end of 2016 we're hoping to have the full persistent universe working and functioning".
You know, full persistent universe as in 100 star systems and all promised ships and every single gameplay system by the end of this year. What else is the FULL persistent universe? Let me hear what spin you're going to put on this one. Should be good for a laugh...

If you're going to troll at least try to be creative.

If you decide to spout more drivel and lies next time make sure that it can not be so easily refuted with actual quotes and facts.

I'm a backer but won't see another dime outta me until something is concrete... i even cancelled my subscription months ago.. this is getting stupid....

They got nothing better to do than build a ship to see which sucker will pay 600, then 1000, then 5000.. just a fucking joke now, and they're sitting there laughing their asses off

loomy wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 17:42:

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 16:32:
is there a game worth buying yet?

NO. There are a few quests and that's it. More than people know, because they talk without playing it. I've spent a few hours playing. But it's not a whole game yet. It is like a DayZ alpha type of situation where everyone has their fun running around in the wild west.

That said, if anyone wanted a deal, they needed to buy the sale packages that just went by. The price of the game is probably going to double now.

I was ready to pay over a hundred to Mechwarrior Online to buy an Atlas. Thank god for the open beta and the insane decision for no single player. Not an mmorpg, just another online battle arena.

Here, I wait. I want to know what the gameplay is. Pure PvP?

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 16:32:
is there a game worth buying yet?

NO. There are a few quests and that's it. More than people know, because they talk without playing it. I've spent a few hours playing. But it's not a whole game yet. It is like a DayZ alpha type of situation where everyone has their fun running around in the wild west.

That said, if anyone wanted a deal, they needed to buy the sale packages that just went by. The price of the game is probably going to double now.

2.0 wouldn't even load for me. Hopefully 2.1 will be better in this regard.

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 16:32:
I'm definitely buying this game at some point, but is there a game worth buying yet? I'm still enjoying Elite Horizons immensely, but I want to get into SC when there's something of substance. It's hard to tell as these threads get polluted so quickly.

There's nothing gameplay-wise now. You can run around, get a ship and fly off to a broken satellite. Then you can eject and fly into said satellite and press a button to fix it. The main "game" is figuring out where the fuck to go on the satellite, because radar is hard or something, even though you have it everywhere else.

I'm definitely buying this game at some point, but is there a game worth buying yet? I'm still enjoying Elite Horizons immensely, but I want to get into SC when there's something of substance. It's hard to tell as these threads get polluted so quickly.

(development continues)

This comment was edited on Jan 15, 2016, 16:32.

{PH}88fingers wrote on Jan 15, 2016, 14:05:
I hear this is much improved from 2.0
I haven't given any of these a try yet, going to wait a bit longer for more content so I can't comment but the feedback seems good

Does this fix the issue with the piloting tutorials freezing for 30 seconds every 2-3 seconds? If not I'm not interested.