![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Star Citizen Gives Backers Their First Taste Of A Fuller Game
- Thread starter Megalith
- Start date
Look, I just want a new Freelancer and/or Imperium Galactica. Someone PM me when I can play one of those.
(Nexus: TJI was great, but went kind of the opposite way of Star Citizen, lopping off potentially awesome features and mechanics left and right to get a game out the door.)
(Nexus: TJI was great, but went kind of the opposite way of Star Citizen, lopping off potentially awesome features and mechanics left and right to get a game out the door.)
Dr. Righteous
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2007
- Messages
- 3,163
ALPHA 2.0??? ALPHA???
This has been in development for how long??? ALPHA???
This has been in development for how long??? ALPHA???
Yes, alpha. That's about where I'd expect them to be at this point in time. I guess if you've never followed game development before it could be shocking to learn how long it takes for them to be made, but it's really not at all surprising once you understand the amount of work that goes into them.
Dr. Righteous
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2007
- Messages
- 3,163
BS! I first read about this game being developed nearly 5 years ago. Ambitious? Yes but there is not much that will explain what has taken so long with the huge amount of money they have raked in except for poor planning, changing course mid way through development etc, etc. I really, really hope it turns out to be something great but there has been a lot of bad signs up till now.
Usually an alpha stage of development means a buggy, incomplete mess. Good luck space travellers.
It's not BS, but given your comments thus far I can see how you would think it is. Try to understand that announcing a game isn't the same as beginning development in earnest. Consider also that there wasn't even a studio yet and that it takes time to hire the people needed to make the game. As has already been discussed in this thread, full scale development began much less than three years ago, and closer to just two.
Actually, there's quite a bit to explain that, but something about your current position suggests you're not the type to accept explanations no matter how rational. Correct me if I'm mistaken.
Taldren
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 521
Wow, I would think trolls like yourself would do at least some research in order to accidentally be taken seriously. CIG just celebrated the 3 year anniversary of the KICKSTARTER launch. The software itself has only been in development for 2 years.
5 Years ago ... whatever troll.
That is literally impossible since the project was first teased on the 11th of September 2012, and formally announced and opened for funding a month later.
I suggest maybe not making things up when trying to form a supporting argument.
At the announcement, CR himself advertised that the game had already been a year in development.
It wasn't until he realized the success of the fund raising, that he threw all previous development in the trash and started from the beginning, effectively lying to the original backers, of which I am one, very low citizen number with a Golden Ticket, and started the current project.
It is all out there for anyone to see. No need to call people trolls and liars. I still remember the original website. Now you have to be a subscriber to see things that were supposed to be transparent.
I do think that there will eventually be a game. I'm not one of those that thinks the whole thing is a sham.
This is simply Starlancer(Squadron42)/Freelancer(StarCitizen) all over again. Which, by the way, is also easily researched history.
Also, the game, as it currently stands, sucks. The immersion neckbeards have ruined it.
It fucking sucks. I will stand by my $150 or so that I've sunk into it and hope Erin Roberts does justice to Squadron42 but it Starlancer is any indication, I spent $ 100 too much so far.
Dayaks
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 9,774
I spent about $100 on an Avenger. Was kind bummed only the front turret is on a swivel. Still fun. Maybe got $30 of gameplay out of it so far.
Anywho - I don't mind waiting ten years if they "do it right."
Anywho - I don't mind waiting ten years if they "do it right."
rezerekted
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2015
- Messages
- 3,054
Not too late to demand a refund, provided you aren't using the same or similar nickname on SC forums as you are on here if you are going to be actively critical of the project. They only offer refunds to those who aren't saying bad things about them.
That's how they ROLLLLLLL
That's how they ROLLLLLLL
And actually, I agree with that policy. It's kind of like bitching when you don't vote.
I believe that my contribution allows me certain liberties with my critique. We, collectively, are the money people, the investors. My $150 is a spit in the ocean but as a group...
Many don't believe that. They believe that your contribution entitles you to shut the fuck up.
CIG has made it clear, with their policy, that that is not the case.
I'm am calling him on his statement that he personally first heard about the game 5 years ago, which is as previously stated, impossible. Either that or he did a very poor job using his words.
We can debate the differences between pre-production (the pre-announcement period, where design and prototyping is performed) and full production (actual development cycle, after prototype and initial design document completion and approval) another time.
FULL PRODUCTION wasn't started until 2013. The "demo" was a proof of concept. They did not have a full team of developers (nor a full studio) working on the game until 2013.
Source? Because the original plan was to see further private investment on the back of a successful crowd funding campaign. This plan was later abandoned once the fully crowd funded model became viable.
To my own knowledge (and a quick bit of research) I know of no history of large scale private investment, or stories about the pulling there of.
...Are you referring to Derek Smart?
That's a load of bull. You're saying the dogfighting module is a test demo? It's a full module, which isn't played by the backers much anymore because it simply isn't fun, and is laggy, and buggy. Those comments come from the original backers. I liked the poll one of the backers did to try to find out why this module wasn't played anymore and that was the responses he got.
This same dogfighting module is the most advanced of all the modules planned for SC, and is the one they hoped showcase for the whole game. If they cant even get this right, then there is no hope.
You realise he's referring to the pre-prod proof of concept demo that was shown in 2012 right? The free flight/dog fight vertical slice was indeed produced after full production was spun up in January 2013.
The project might well end up being toast but there is little actual concrete evidence to support that theory at this point. All I seem to see is people stretching the rumours, the rantings of a seemingly unstable failed developer and even the development time itself (ranging from months to years) in order to sell a narrative they've deeply bought into. The open hostility on display is frankly bizarre.
Tall poppy syndrome in full force.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
I'm talking about the "demo" video they made when they launched the crowdfunding campaign, it was a proof of concept showing that they knew what they were doing and what they were aiming for.
This was not made with a full development team and full production had not started on the game.
Shortly into 2013 is when they ramped up to full-production mode, getting a full development team together, getting the studio fully into work on the game.
They then released the "hanger module" in August of 2013.
The "dogfighting" module that you are talking about wasn't released until 2014 for crying out loud.
Some of you seriously need to learn your facts and stop acting like RSI/Star Citizen is some kind of failure or they are faaaaaar behind. It's been in full development for a little under three years now, about on track with the same kind of development you'd expect from GTA V and similar huge-scope open world games that take 5'ish years or so to complete.
No, not regardless of ownership. If you are the sole owner of your company, you can do whatever the fuck you want with its property, you just have to be careful how you declare it to the tax authorities.
Chris Robert hiring his wife is a complete non-issue. The only people with a vested concern are the shareholders of the company. Those are, according to the website, Chris Roberts and his buddy Ortwin Freyermuth. There may be silent partners, but that is speculation. I'm going to assume that Mr. Freyermuth was okay with the hiring.
The backers of Star Citizen are at best stakeholders, i.e. have no legal standing, if you look at Kickstarter's TOS. CIG continued the fundraising through their website, but I can't imagine their TOS gave the backers any further legal standing.
But then again...
Actually, it's about ethics in game industry hiring.
thenoseknows
n00b
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2014
- Messages
- 17
I see you're more of a fan of the Activision/EA/Ubisoft development schedule.
The game's Kickstarter was in 2012. 3 years isn't that long.
infojunkie
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Messages
- 340
It's funny people started saying that AFTER they missed Nov 2014 deadline.
I said there was no way the game could meet the deadline on 2014 summer and I got flamed as a troll on the SC gaming thread lol. Until 2014 the exact same clip was used as a proof of how well the game was making the progress.
For those of you who believe SC is on track to deliver the game in a reasonable time period - what is a reasonable time period for you?
I'm basing this question on how CR said the game had been in development 1 year before kickstarter, making this year 3 if not closer to year 4.
At what point do you throw up your hands and agree the project wont see the light of day, unless they're release the game as is, as in very buggy and mostly nonfunctional compared to what was promised?
We have Bethesda Studios famed for keeping a 5-6 year development schedule for their 'bread and butter' series like The Elder Scrolls and Fallout. They got a mature team handling both series as well as a game engine created in house for their own purposes, and already tested on several of their games. Why the optimism that CGI can get this right when they don't have the same resources as the larger game companies? One would think they would need to get their game engine modified enough to accommodate their vision before even working on the game, instead the game engine is still work in progress at 3 year mark, despite hiring away several Crytek employees.
I'm basing this question on how CR said the game had been in development 1 year before kickstarter, making this year 3 if not closer to year 4.
At what point do you throw up your hands and agree the project wont see the light of day, unless they're release the game as is, as in very buggy and mostly nonfunctional compared to what was promised?
We have Bethesda Studios famed for keeping a 5-6 year development schedule for their 'bread and butter' series like The Elder Scrolls and Fallout. They got a mature team handling both series as well as a game engine created in house for their own purposes, and already tested on several of their games. Why the optimism that CGI can get this right when they don't have the same resources as the larger game companies? One would think they would need to get their game engine modified enough to accommodate their vision before even working on the game, instead the game engine is still work in progress at 3 year mark, despite hiring away several Crytek employees.
That was not a "proof of concept" originally. Anyone who says so is being dishonest or deceived.
The original pitch was for money to FINISH, I repeat, FINISH what had already been developed.
I remember the original video and pitch as if it was burned into my brain.
The original pitch was for money to FINISH, I repeat, FINISH what had already been developed.
I remember the original video and pitch as if it was burned into my brain.
I do not know what you're talking about, they never stated during the original crowdfunding that they were already into development and it was simply to finish and polish what they had.
Not to mention the scope of the game as they surpassed greatly what they originally planned.
This video clearly shows the timeline of how development has went and where it was at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEH2GpV8Ua4
Unless you think they were somehow going to build this entire game with SEVEN people , which is how many they had working on the game in October of 2012.
In Feb. of 2013 is when the Austin office was started and they had 20 developers at that time.
The video shows clearly how they developed the game and how the staff grew.
I do not know where you heard or think they said that they had the game built with just 7 people working on it BEFORE crowdfunding and all they needed was money to finish what they had...
Derek Smart also claims there are thousands of people a day playing his games on Steam when clearly the numbers show its more like 1 or 2 people every 3 weeks.
infojunkie
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Messages
- 340
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1039221123&postcount=43
I think you should re-read the first few pages of SC thread, facts are there, including your posts. The so called 'demo' clip, was told to be made with real assets, in real engine. They didn't even have a functioning engine working at 2014.
and what kind of game starts counting with 'full deveopement' employees working under it? Ubi games never have 'full developement' forces on it. It's always story writers on one, while artists follow, then concepts, programmers, actors, sounds, visuals, and whatever else comes and goes while all the unneeded forces are working on other games. Duke Nukem never had 'full developement' until the very last moment (or never looking at the state of the game), What makes SC so special that we suddenly have to start counting employee headcounts and assume the announcement videos are only concepts?
ManofGod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2007
- Messages
- 12,864
I really do not care what their policy is at all. If he releases a game and I like it, I will buy it. I am too old and a lot more careful with what I spend than the way I used to be. If you or anyone wants to spend their money on this, fine, enjoy but me, I will buy it when it is an actual game and not before that.
Now, I still can complain but mostly, I could not care less and have better things to do with my time. I loved the Wing Commander series but this does not appear to be going down the same path. If I had donated, complained and then asked for my money back and he refused because I complained, that is just plain stupid. Near $100 Million and still no game to speak of, enjoy.
One thing for sure is that when Star Citizen fails spectacularly in the future is that it likely will spur about legislation to regulate crowdfundings and possibly bring them under the purview of the SEC. So incompetent morons like Sandi "I know Filipino and Tagalog!" / "Qualified Marine Biologist" Gardiner Roberts is not VP of Marketing and that there is actual public disclosure of where the fucking money is going.
No, not regardless of ownership. If you are the sole owner of your company, you can do whatever the fuck you want with its property, you just have to be careful how you declare it to the tax authorities.
Chris Robert hiring his wife is a complete non-issue. The only people with a vested concern are the shareholders of the company. Those are, according to the website, Chris Roberts and his buddy Ortwin Freyermuth. There may be silent partners, but that is speculation. I'm going to assume that Mr. Freyermuth was okay with the hiring.
The backers of Star Citizen are at best stakeholders, i.e. have no legal standing, if you look at Kickstarter's TOS. CIG continued the fundraising through their website, but I can't imagine their TOS gave the backers any further legal standing.
But then again...
Actually, it's about ethics in game industry hiring.
Yes regardless of ownership. If it is incorporated, that makes it a legally separate entity.
The backers are customers who purchased a product and have the right to get what they paid for. From a legal standpoint, Kickstarter is a sale, not an investment. That is why they don't allow cash rewards; if they did, Kickstarter would be classified as an investment broker and would have to follow FINRA and SEC regulations.
Darunion
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 5,339
Kinda waiting for when it does finally come out, something better comes out a month later and everyone moves on. Maybe some open world space combat game where you shoot Kilrathi or w/e. Mark Hamil can still do it!
You guys realize that every time you say this, you're calling Chris Roberts a liar, right? He has said, repeatedly, that development started in 2011.
You also cannot keep pretending that everything before 2013 doesn't count. Very few video games start production and throw 300 people on it day one.
Is it legal? Sure. That doesn't mean it's ethical.
No CEO of a significant public company would hire his F list actress wife to be a VP. CIG isn't legally a public company but since it was funded with the publics money, it should be treated like one.
It just doesn't pass the smell test. Would it fly with a public company? No. Would it fly if the source of CIGs funding was a traditional publisher or one or more big investors? No. So why does it now?