Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed

The Squadron 42 campaign for Star Citizen is delayed until 2017, reports Kotaku UK, saying the news was revealed during a livestream from CitizenCon. The first chapter of the single-player side of the space simulator was most recently supposed to come to backers this year, but this news confirms rumors of a delay that surfaced last month. On the bright side, Eurogamer notes that Cloud Imperium Games released a new video showing off how planets will be procedurally generated in the game, along with other tidbits, including a sandworm, though they don't specify whether this is showing us Beetleguise or Dune. Back to the delay, the Kotaku UK story offers two slides with details on the state of the project, and here is what those say:
S42 Primary Tech Hurdles

Content

Most of our base technology is now complete
Still in Progress:
Subsumption

  • Pathfinding Logic
  • Full Animation Integration
  • Improved Combat Logic
  • Mission System Integration
  • Enhanced Fight AI

Object Container Streaming
CPU and GPU Optimizations

S42 Status Update

Content

  • All chapters and gameplay features at grey-box or better
  • Taking one chapter to final ship quality - flushes out any technical, integration and polish issues.
  • Building Technology & Systems for the long term and the whole SC universe - no short cuts!

View : : :
214 Replies. 11 pages. Viewing page 2.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  ] Older
194.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 16, 2016, 13:11
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 16, 2016, 13:11
Oct 16, 2016, 13:11
 
RedEye9 wrote on Oct 16, 2016, 10:15:
Don't let KX fool you, he dropped a grand on the game and when he got cold feet he got the money back with such fanfare you would have thought he discovered the cure for cancer.
His mo is set in stone and this won't be the last time he pre-buys a game or kickstarter and is disappointed, just read a NMSky thread. ;)
His vendetta against the game has been quite entertaining. Which is bizarre, as he invested a huge amount of money, didn't like the direction of the game and they refunded him. Can you imagine EA or Ubisoft doing the same?

RedEye9 wrote on Oct 16, 2016, 10:15:
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 18:14:
Here's a picture of me with Chris Roberts, with Erin Roberts and Dave Haddock.

Arghhh, not the pants again.
Allthumbsup

NasWulf wrote on Oct 16, 2016, 10:29:
so far I think this sums it up for the fans (time stamp 15:52) and how most fans feel about the game ... NMS had the same passion from fan but on a unseen level, fans were threatening death to people who spoke ill about the game they only seen snippits of. At least in SCs case you (as a fan) get to watch and be apart of that development.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRsF6_lwLas
I think that video highlights the openness of the development process. The aimed high and couldn't deliver on time, with fans expressing their disappointment. The community is generally very reasonable - people have a lot of passion for the game but if CIG messes up they're the first to point that out.

For me CitizenCon was a disappointment, as impressive as the Homestead demo was. We were expecting footage from S42 and that's an aspect of the game that has been kept under close wraps to prevent spoilers. If we see the demo this year then I'll be happy - if we don't then that concerns me, especially if they were supposedly close to having it ready.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
193.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 16, 2016, 10:29
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 16, 2016, 10:29
Oct 16, 2016, 10:29
 
RedEye9 wrote on Oct 16, 2016, 10:15:
Don't let KX fool you, he dropped a grand on the game and when he got cold feet he got the money back with such fanfare you would have thought he discovered the cure for cancer.
His mo is set in stone and this won't be the last time he pre-buys a game or kickstarter and is disappointed, just read a NMSky thread.

so far I think this sums it up for the fans (time stamp 15:52) and how most fans feel about the game ... NMS had the same passion from fan but on a unseen level, fans were threatening death to people who spoke ill about the game they only seen snippits of. At least in SCs case you (as a fan) get to watch and be apart of that development.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRsF6_lwLas

I've only backed one KS game, Midair because I love tribes, but I can see why people throw money at this tittle.

but remember, it's all a lie and a con with chris on his private island.

This comment was edited on Oct 16, 2016, 10:35.
192.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 16, 2016, 10:15
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 16, 2016, 10:15
Oct 16, 2016, 10:15
 
NasWulf wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 17:37:
jdreyer wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 17:00:
What's your take on why people give hundreds or thousands of dollars to this project years after it was announced?

why they still do? I have not a clue. But is it the same people? or newer players seeing the demos and then deciding to take the dive into SC? Do you think the same 1.5 million backers continually spending money on the project? I mean, the backers seems to grow as the funding grows so it seems to me that it's mostly newer people dropping funds and not necessarily the same "cultist" backers spending their entire paychecks every week.

I know kxmode and a few others believe I myself have drop 22K on a game because I use a U in my nick and only post in SC threads ...

Don't let KX fool you, he dropped a grand on the game and when he got cold feet he got the money back with such fanfare you would have thought he discovered the cure for cancer.
His mo is set in stone and this won't be the last time he pre-buys a game or kickstarter and is disappointed, just read a NMSky thread.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 18:14:
Here's a picture of me with Chris Roberts, with Erin Roberts and Dave Haddock.

Arghhh, not the pants again.


A mask is not a political statement.
It's an IQ test. It's a compassion test. It's a decency test. It's a social responsibility test.
Cover Your Eyes for even more protection.
Avatar 58135
191.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 18:14
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 18:14
Oct 15, 2016, 18:14
 
jdreyer wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 17:00:
What's your take on why people give hundreds or thousands of dollars to this project years after it was announced?
When I backed the Kickstarter I put in $45. I was extremely interested in the game but couldn't justify more than that. It wasn't until the release of Arena Commander that I increased my pledge, as I really liked the direction of the game and wanted to support it. Over time I've spent small amounts upgrading to various different ships, buying merchandise, etc. I also gifted some copies of the game to friends and family when there were some offers. My total spend is now $620 - that includes several T-shirts, a CitizenCon ticket, four game packages (two for friends; two for me, including the limited edition AMD package) and an additional ship. In total that works out to about $12 a month.

For that money I've got to enjoy the game as it progress, watch all the community content (hours of videos a week), meet backers and developers at CitizenCon (I got to talk to Chris Roberts, Erin Roberts, Sandi Gardiner and Dave Haddock), go on Concorde, shape the development of the game and make many friends. For me that's incredible value for money.

Here's a picture of me with Chris Roberts, with Erin Roberts and Dave Haddock.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
190.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 17:54
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 17:54
Oct 15, 2016, 17:54
 
jdreyer wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 04:48:
Fine, but you see my point? WoW was designed to appeal to both the LCD and hardcore. Star Citizen is only the latter. While I personally am glad for that, it limits the ability appeal to the masses, limiting players.
There's nothing inherently 'hardcore' about the game. In fact it's being built in a way that it appeals to everyone - people can focus on FPS combat, cargo running, racing, space combat, socialising, piracy, etc. That's what will give it mainstream appeal.

Kosumo wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 05:39:
As of now, whatever is abled to be played by backers in 2.4, could you explain to me what is multi-crew gameplay?
As of now ships are able to be used to transport other players and to man turrets. I often play with friends where one of us will pilot and the other will man the turrets, then get off at satellites to bring them back on line whilst the pilot patrols. On larger ships, like the Starfarer, you can even have large firefights involving a dozen players. As with most of the game it's rather basic at the moment but is expanding with each release.

Peeeling wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 09:22:
Elite is not a finished game. It's every bit as much a work in progress as SC. The difference is that it's been developed in a sensible manner, so what you get right now is a solid, joined-up experience that could pass for a complete, albeit rather insubstantial game. To say that SC is being developed in a better way because you prefer their specific flight/combat system is silly. I'm not claiming the Elite devs are making better design decisions. I'm saying they're making infinitely better development and scheduling decisions.
That's your opinion. I disagree.

Peeeling wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 09:22:
Again, double standards. You're comparing Elite in its current work-in-progress form with a product you're imagining playing in X years time.
Elite: Dangerous has been released. Star Citizen is in alpha. Elite is being expanded upon but you can't pretend it hasn't been released - it was released two years ago. I own both games, so don't pretend I'm not familiar with them.

jdreyer wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 16:57:
A year ago I would have agreed with you. There's an old adage in the charity industry, "You have to spend money to make money. " They have spent a couple mil on all of the vids, contests, website, Citcon, and all the other community outreach they've done. They've pulled in $30M. So you could say it was not inefficiently spent at all. Without that expenditure they don't bring in 10% of that.
The videos they put out are funded by subscribers, which is a separate budget. The community team, including people like Sandi Gardiner, are paid directly out of subscriber funds rather than out of the crowdfunding total. The subscriptions run up to $264, meaning that if just 1.5% of subscribers were backers you're talking about an additional $6m a year. That money goes to promoting the game and keeping the community informed of the development, without taking away from the development budget.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
189.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 17:37
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 17:37
Oct 15, 2016, 17:37
 
jdreyer wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 17:00:
What's your take on why people give hundreds or thousands of dollars to this project years after it was announced?

why they still do? I have not a clue. But is it the same people? or newer players seeing the demos and then deciding to take the dive into SC? Do you think the same 1.5 million backers continually spending money on the project? I mean, the backers seems to grow as the funding grows so it seems to me that it's mostly newer people dropping funds and not necessarily the same "cultist" backers spending their entire paychecks every week.

I know kxmode and a few others believe I myself have drop 22K on a game because I use a U in my nick and only post in SC threads ... frankly if I had 22K to spend on a game, I wouldn't be hanging out on the bluesnews forums, but I'll just keep loling at the DS conspiracy theory crap and calling them out on it ... I myself will most likely drop my 50$ on SC when StarMarine hits (if its any good) or when 3.0 hits as that seems to be the sweet spot in terms of what will be released at that time, I'm more a FPS player over a space sim but I did enjoy all the wing commander games. I tend to think that's what more people will do as well when more tech is finally released. I think you'll see more people willing to buy in, but as to why people funded or are still funding SC? ... well that's anyone's guess, different strokes for different folks.

What gets me though ... honestly ... is when people who what to see the project die for some reason or just want to hate bash on other people who are spending their own money on whatever they want, like they are EF Hutton with other peoples money and they are trying to stop whomever from wasting their money on .jpgs ... lol its a funny concept. Like THEY are the ones who are going to stop it ....

But again as to why SC seems to continue to rake in the cash from players? passion from fans? Cultism? IDK ... Why do people buy CoD every year when they know its the same game? Why does Sony fan boyees bash Xbox fan boyees, and vice versa?

This comment was edited on Oct 15, 2016, 17:42.
188.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 17:00
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 17:00
Oct 15, 2016, 17:00
 
NasWulf wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 14:36:
do you have evidence they don't have the money? because no one else seems too, on the contrary ... I mean if you have insider information that shows CIG is lacking the funds to finish, please share, im sure the others would love to see

you like the others are basing your funds information on other games development history, but there has never been a game developed like this or funded like this (and there probably never will be again), and they continue to bring in the funds monthly/daily. if they stopped taking in money on the day the KS campaign ended and we are still awaiting 4 years later on something, i would say .. hell ya they don't have the funds .. but money still flows into their coffers as we speak. If CR came out with a desperate plea for funds to say they need more to finish then sure fears confirmed ... but they don't ever say anything about lacking funds ... if they were closing up studios to save money then sure , but they are always expanding .. so again on the contrary

/sigh

edit ... I know some of you think CR is the dumbest developer out there, but you don't continue to hire people at a good pay rate if you're running out of money , and you don't continue to hire people and build out technology to cover up some grand scale con scram ... a scam artist doesn't continue to spend his earnings from a con on the con, he would have just walked away years ago ...

What's your take on why people give hundreds or thousands of dollars to this project years after it was announced?
To prevent CV-19, avoid the Serious Seven: weddings, funerals, faith-based activities, bars, gyms, house gatherings and other small events.
Avatar 22024
187.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 16:57
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 16:57
Oct 15, 2016, 16:57
 
Peeeling wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 13:38:
NasWulf wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 09:45:
Peeeling wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 09:22:
I'll say again: just imagine how exciting a place we would be in if SC, with the flight mechanics and combat you prefer, were in the same place as E:D is now with $115m still in the bank to be spent on features and content to flesh it out.

I can see both sides of the argument until people bring up the money issues, and i'll say again ... no one but CIG knows their financial situation. You nor I know if they do indeed have 115 million in funds to finish the game, or if then only have 1 million. The argument is fine about how they are developing the game vs. other games, but when anyone brings up the money .. "they will run out .. mark my words!" .. well as it stands it doesn't look to be the case as they continue to rake in the cash, and did you catch the brand deal with intel? so stop with the money argue as that is a losing argument ... maybe in 4 years and nothing to show ...

I just won the money argument, when you said I was right about how they're developing the game. It's not about whether they'll run out. It's about what they'll be able to do with the money they have. If SC is being developed in a stupid, inefficient way (and it is), then they won't be able to achieve the best possible result with their money. And since the money they have is way short of what they would need to make the game everyone's expecting (I base this on the fact that less ambitious games routinely cost more when made by seasoned veterans of the genre), it seems inevitable that they will fail to deliver. They don't have the money to do what they're promising, and they're wasting the money they've got.
A year ago I would have agreed with you. There's an old adage in the charity industry, "You have to spend money to make money. " They have spent a couple mil on all of the vids, contests, website, Citcon, and all the other community outreach they've done. They've pulled in $30M. So you could say it was not inefficiently spent at all. Without that expenditure they don't bring in 10% of that.
To prevent CV-19, avoid the Serious Seven: weddings, funerals, faith-based activities, bars, gyms, house gatherings and other small events.
Avatar 22024
186.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 16:46
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 16:46
Oct 15, 2016, 16:46
 
NasWulf wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 09:45:
Peeeling wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 09:22:
I'll say again: just imagine how exciting a place we would be in if SC, with the flight mechanics and combat you prefer, were in the same place as E:D is now with $115m still in the bank to be spent on features and content to flesh it out.

I can see both sides of the argument until people bring up the money issues, and i'll say again ... no one but CIG knows their financial situation. You nor I know if they do indeed have 115 million in funds to finish the game, or if then only have 1 million. The argument is fine about how they are developing the game vs. other games, but when anyone brings up the money .. "they will run out .. mark my words!" .. well as it stands it doesn't look to be the case as they continue to rake in the cash, and did you catch the brand deal with intel? so stop with the money argue as that is a losing argument ... maybe in 4 years and nothing to show ...
It's a good point. As one of the people a year ago thinking they would run out of money by now, I'm feeling a little bit better about their business. I'm still not convinced that they will be able to deliver everything they have promised, I think they will probably finish both SQ42 and enough of the PU to be fun.
To prevent CV-19, avoid the Serious Seven: weddings, funerals, faith-based activities, bars, gyms, house gatherings and other small events.
Avatar 22024
185.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 14:36
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 14:36
Oct 15, 2016, 14:36
 
do you have evidence they don't have the money? because no one else seems too, on the contrary ... I mean if you have insider information that shows CIG is lacking the funds to finish, please share, im sure the others would love to see

you like the others are basing your funds information on other games development history, but there has never been a game developed like this or funded like this (and there probably never will be again), and they continue to bring in the funds monthly/daily. if they stopped taking in money on the day the KS campaign ended and we are still awaiting 4 years later on something, i would say .. hell ya they don't have the funds .. but money still flows into their coffers as we speak. If CR came out with a desperate plea for funds to say they need more to finish then sure fears confirmed ... but they don't ever say anything about lacking funds ... if they were closing up studios to save money then sure , but they are always expanding .. so again on the contrary

/sigh

edit ... I know some of you think CR is the dumbest developer out there, but you don't continue to hire people at a good pay rate if you're running out of money , and you don't continue to hire people and build out technology to cover up some grand scale con scram ... a scam artist doesn't continue to spend his earnings from a con on the con, he would have just walked away years ago ...

This comment was edited on Oct 15, 2016, 15:55.
184.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 13:38
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 13:38
Oct 15, 2016, 13:38
 
NasWulf wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 09:45:
Peeeling wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 09:22:
I'll say again: just imagine how exciting a place we would be in if SC, with the flight mechanics and combat you prefer, were in the same place as E:D is now with $115m still in the bank to be spent on features and content to flesh it out.

I can see both sides of the argument until people bring up the money issues, and i'll say again ... no one but CIG knows their financial situation. You nor I know if they do indeed have 115 million in funds to finish the game, or if then only have 1 million. The argument is fine about how they are developing the game vs. other games, but when anyone brings up the money .. "they will run out .. mark my words!" .. well as it stands it doesn't look to be the case as they continue to rake in the cash, and did you catch the brand deal with intel? so stop with the money argue as that is a losing argument ... maybe in 4 years and nothing to show ...

I just won the money argument, when you said I was right about how they're developing the game. It's not about whether they'll run out. It's about what they'll be able to do with the money they have. If SC is being developed in a stupid, inefficient way (and it is), then they won't be able to achieve the best possible result with their money. And since the money they have is way short of what they would need to make the game everyone's expecting (I base this on the fact that less ambitious games routinely cost more when made by seasoned veterans of the genre), it seems inevitable that they will fail to deliver. They don't have the money to do what they're promising, and they're wasting the money they've got.
183.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 09:45
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 09:45
Oct 15, 2016, 09:45
 
Peeeling wrote on Oct 15, 2016, 09:22:
I'll say again: just imagine how exciting a place we would be in if SC, with the flight mechanics and combat you prefer, were in the same place as E:D is now with $115m still in the bank to be spent on features and content to flesh it out.

I can see both sides of the argument until people bring up the money issues, and i'll say again ... no one but CIG knows their financial situation. You nor I know if they do indeed have 115 million in funds to finish the game, or if then only have 1 million. The argument is fine about how they are developing the game vs. other games, but when anyone brings up the money .. "they will run out .. mark my words!" .. well as it stands it doesn't look to be the case as they continue to rake in the cash, and did you catch the brand deal with intel? so stop with the money argue as that is a losing argument ... maybe in 4 years and nothing to show ...
182.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 09:22
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 09:22
Oct 15, 2016, 09:22
 
Elite is not a finished game. It's every bit as much a work in progress as SC. The difference is that it's been developed in a sensible manner, so what you get right now is a solid, joined-up experience that could pass for a complete, albeit rather insubstantial game. To say that SC is being developed in a better way because you prefer their specific flight/combat system is silly. I'm not claiming the Elite devs are making better design decisions. I'm saying they're making infinitely better development and scheduling decisions.

I'll say again: just imagine how exciting a place we would be in if SC, with the flight mechanics and combat you prefer, were in the same place as E:D is now with $115m still in the bank to be spent on features and content to flesh it out.

"Elite: Dangerous just doesn't have the replayability that Star Citizen is being designed with."

Again, double standards. You're comparing Elite in its current work-in-progress form with a product you're imagining playing in X years time. Crazy out-of-the-ass claims like "one planet will have more content than most games". Where are you getting that from? What 'most games' are you talking about? The Witcher? Flappy Bird?

181.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 05:39
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 05:39
Oct 15, 2016, 05:39
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 17:11:
There's also the multi-crew gameplay, which is a major game changer.

As of now, whatever is abled to be played by backers in 2.4, could you explain to me what is multi-crew gameplay?
180.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 15, 2016, 04:48
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 15, 2016, 04:48
Oct 15, 2016, 04:48
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 17:11:
jdreyer wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 15:21:
Comparing SC to CSGO is just ridiculous. CSGO is popular due to its hypercompetitive replayability and gambling. SC aims to be an open world sandbox. WoW is a better comparison to the PU, but whereas Blizzard opted for streamlining, RSI is taking the opposite tack. They're trying to model everything in simlike detail in a direct appeal to the hardcore. This will quickly drive away all but the most hardcore.
Star Citizen is looking to be the World Of Warcraft of its genre. It's being built to last a decade, not disappear in a couple of years like Elite: Dangerous or a couple of months like No Man's Sky. Whether it will achieve that is another matter but that's what it's aiming for.

Fine, but you see my point? WoW was designed to appeal to both the LCD and hardcore. Star Citizen is only the latter. While I personally am glad for that, it limits the ability appeal to the masses, limiting players.

And comparing SC to TF or CSGO is stupid. Just stop.
To prevent CV-19, avoid the Serious Seven: weddings, funerals, faith-based activities, bars, gyms, house gatherings and other small events.
Avatar 22024
179.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 14, 2016, 23:33
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 14, 2016, 23:33
Oct 14, 2016, 23:33
 
Ain't No Thread Like A Star Citizen Thread 'Cuz A Star Citizen Thread Don't Stop!
Avatar 56178
178.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 14, 2016, 17:11
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 14, 2016, 17:11
Oct 14, 2016, 17:11
 
Peeeling wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 08:06:
You can play E:D, but you find it boring because there isn't enough to do yet. In SC you can, as of right now, do even less, but you aren't bored by it because you can't actually play it yet. So you're still free to imagine how exciting it will be to play when that eventually happens.
I don't particularly care for the flight mechanics and combat in Elite: Dangerous. It feels a bit disconnected and slow. The combat and flight mechanics in Star Citizen really appeal to me and I find it already very enjoyable. There's also the multi-crew gameplay, which is a major game changer. The gameplay that's already in Star Citizen is for me significantly more enjoyable than Elite: Dangerous and it's being actively developed - it's nowhere near complete. And it's not because I can't play it yet, as I'm all to aware of the issues - currently the framerate is appalling, which means it isn't very enjoyable at the moment.

Star Citizen is the game that I want to play. Elite: Dangerous was just something to play while I was waiting. Even though Star Citizen is only in alpha I've played it substantially more than Elite: Dangerous, which is a completed game.

saluk wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 12:50:
They have no financial incentive to finish the game. They will keep delaying until people stop paying.
Nonsense. The incentive is that they can sell people the next chapters and future expansions. Squadron 42 is only the first chapter in a Star Wars like trilogy.

jdreyer wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 15:21:
You're usually so logical and stick to the facts, but you've really jumped the shark with this comment. Elite came out 2 years ago. Of course player count is way down. You really think SC will have more than a few thousand 2 years after launch?
Team Fortress 2 has 50,000+ players and it was released nearly ten years ago; Counter-Strike: Global Offensive was released four years ago and has 500,000+ players; World Of Warcraft still have millions of players. The age of the game isn't the issue. Elite: Dangerous just doesn't have the replayability that Star Citizen is being designed with.

jdreyer wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 15:21:
Comparing SC to CSGO is just ridiculous. CSGO is popular due to its hypercompetitive replayability and gambling. SC aims to be an open world sandbox. WoW is a better comparison to the PU, but whereas Blizzard opted for streamlining, RSI is taking the opposite tack. They're trying to model everything in simlike detail in a direct appeal to the hardcore. This will quickly drive away all but the most hardcore.
Star Citizen is looking to be the World Of Warcraft of its genre. It's being built to last a decade, not disappear in a couple of years like Elite: Dangerous or a couple of months like No Man's Sky. Whether it will achieve that is another matter but that's what it's aiming for.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
177.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 14, 2016, 15:21
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 14, 2016, 15:21
Oct 14, 2016, 15:21
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 07:51:
Peeeling wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 07:09:
Just to clarify: it's not my contention that SC (by which I mean the vision of SC they've allowed fans to conjure in their heads over the years) would be done by now if it had been done properly.

What I'm saying is that if it had been done properly, everyone (including me) would, right now, be happily flying our ships around a huge multiplayer persistent universe, getting out and walking around space stations, driving around planets, trading, doing missions, upgrading our ships - and I can say that with confidence because Elite has already done most of that on a tiny fraction of the budget.
I own Elite: Dangerous and they're not even in the same league. Same with No Man's Sky - it may have a huge universe but if there is so little to do there then it doesn't have any staying power. CIG is developing the game with the big picture in mind, basing it around an expansive lore and extremely involved gameplay mechanics. However, that doesn't come overnight. WoW took years after release to become a worthwhile game and even then it relied heavily on rinse and repeat fetch missions.

Owning both Elite: Dangerous and Star Citizen I can say with confidence that I much prefer the route being taken by CIG. It's not about a sprint, it's about a marathon. They're developing a game that will be actively played for a decade, not something that will quickly lose its appeal. According to Steam there are less than 6,000 people playing per day - more people are playing DayZ and Borderlands 2, older games that have replayability and a community. Look at Counter-Strike: Global Offensive - it has over half a million daily players. That's what CIG is looking to achieve with Star Citizen and rushing the game out is a great way to kill off any chance of that happening.

You're usually so logical and stick to the facts, but you've really jumped the shark with this comment. Elite came out 2 years ago. Of course player count is way down. You really think SC will have more than a few thousand 2 years after launch? While I agree that it is better to have the full game all at once, it won't matter if they never finish. And I am sure people will still be playing Elite in 10 years. Also Elite has a huge nonsteam community so it's hard to know what the actual player count is.

Comparing SC to CSGO is just ridiculous. CSGO is popular due to its hypercompetitive replayability and gambling. SC aims to be an open world sandbox. WoW is a better comparison to the PU, but whereas Blizzard opted for streamlining, RSI is taking the opposite tack. They're trying to model everything in simlike detail in a direct appeal to the hardcore. This will quickly drive away all but the most hardcore.

Although Roberts talks about minimum viable product, the way RSI is approaching their development is contrary to that. MVP is the Elite approach.
To prevent CV-19, avoid the Serious Seven: weddings, funerals, faith-based activities, bars, gyms, house gatherings and other small events.
Avatar 22024
176.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 14, 2016, 14:01
nin
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 14, 2016, 14:01
Oct 14, 2016, 14:01
 nin
 
Dacron wrote on Oct 14, 2016, 11:23:
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 13, 2016, 21:08:
Troll. Troll. Troll. Troll. Troll.


No worries, you can call me a troll, it's not like anybody can't see the starry eye fan boi you are with the constant excuses your parrot from CR.

lol.


If that's not the pot calling the kettle, I don't know what is. lol indeed.

175.
 
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
Oct 14, 2016, 12:50
Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed Oct 14, 2016, 12:50
Oct 14, 2016, 12:50
 
They have no financial incentive to finish the game. They will keep delaying until people stop paying. And if/when that ever happens, they will dump whatever they have cobbled together by then out the door and disappear into the starry starry night.
214 Replies. 11 pages. Viewing page 2.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  ] Older