I really need to get my Rift set up again and try out Elite one of these days. Picked the game up a while back and haven't had the time to dedicate to learning it yet.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Star Citizen Backers No Longer Able to Get Refunds
- Thread starter Megalith
- Start date
- Status
I really need to get my Rift set up again and try out Elite one of these days. Picked the game up a while back and haven't had the time to dedicate to learning it yet.
motomonkey
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 1,490
Next time a free weekend for Squad pops up on Steam, download it and give it a try, you have a tiny Dev team that's hammering out a fun FPS game, that's in Alpha now, with dozens of servers up with thousands of players playing the shit out of the game.
It's not the Ultimate FPS shooter ever made with every feature possible and a custom highspeed graphics engine, but it will be released before Star Citizen.....
And they haven't milked $200 million out of the people playing the game for questionable content, either. or did sketchy shit like change the TOS.
It's not the Ultimate FPS shooter ever made with every feature possible and a custom highspeed graphics engine, but it will be released before Star Citizen.....
And they haven't milked $200 million out of the people playing the game for questionable content, either. or did sketchy shit like change the TOS.
motomonkey
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 1,490
Ignorant? look in a mirror son, I wrote the truth in that post, are you, or are you not, a dedicated, true believer that tolerates no ill spoken of Star Citizen? what the fuck does that make you, a critic? man, you Fanatics....
Right, me saying that you don't know what you're talking about because you're wrong and we can see and play how you're wrong makes me a "fanatic". I can actually use my eyes and ears...so what does this make you? Blind and deaf?
Oh, the game that's been in Early Access for nearly 3 years that doesn't have entire worlds, galaxy, dozens of ships, an entire single player campaign, multiple missions in MP, space stations, planetary bases, among dozens of other things? That relatively TINY game that still hasn't released that you're making a completely fucking stupid comparison with? That Squad?
Lol...ignorant indeed...
Neither does Star Citizen. CIG has promised those things, but not delivered on all them yet. Until something is actually in the game you cannot claim that they exist.
motomonkey
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 1,490
I called you a fan boi, I didn’t make any other statement. Are you, or are you not? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Just keep in mind we have a lot of evidence posted above by you that would seem to indicate that you are indeed, a fan boi.
No, it does, just not available in the, ya know, alpha. It isn't the full game, there's a lot they have and are working on that we don't have. Squad could fail tomorrow and be gone as well. Are they as open with their development?
Oh! Please do tell what you know of how the game is in trouble. What is with you people saying stuff you don't know? Of course you'll have nothing to say of how the game is in trouble because you don't have anything to say unless you just feel like making up more shit.
Are you or are you not ignorant of which you speak? A simle yes or yes will suffice. There's no evidence of me being anything other than setting you people straight in what an in development game is. None of you seem to care to actually look into what you say...what's the opposite of a fanboy? Also, why do you keep spelling "boy" wrong?
Until a feature is delivered it is nothing more than a promise. They sure as hell do not have a "full single player campaign" when the single-player mode is still in pre-Alpha.
motomonkey
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 1,490
Yes, that Squad, the one the tiny dev team is making work on less than the budget that CIG has for its snack bar.
D
Deleted member 204526
Guest
I'd say sunken costs in both time and money is the reason most fanatics continue to defend it. It's the same as with anything else, when you invest a lot of yourself into a thing, you're driven to defend it beyond all reason.
What? There's been plenty released that they've discussed. Sorry they haven't released every single fucking thing to do in the alpha yet. You got me there...the whole thing is in SHAMBLES THEN! Damn, what a scam.
I'm not the one making claims that a game has something that it does not currently have. Do try to keep your own posts and arguments straight.
motomonkey
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 1,490
Oh, I know what I am talking about. I know a fanboi when I see one.
And Because spelling it “Boi” is an alternative
spelling.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/fanboi
So I guess all games being developed just straight up don't exist to you because you can't play them. Do they come out of no where like magic?
Except that you don't? You've yet to show it. In fact, you've shown the opposite I'd say.
motomonkey
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 1,490
My gawd, you really are obtuse, you can’t even pull your head out of Chris Roberts ass long enough to tell when you are being trolled.
Until they're in the hands of players, essentially. Any feature can be canceled or go tits up at anytime. There was just recently a game that was in development hell for years following crowdfunding that the developers decided to cancel a bunch of promised features. If CIG decides some feature isn't working or they need to scale back on it in some way then that's that. CIG has made a shit ton of lofty promises and until I see them actually live up to them I won't believe that everything they're promising is possible.
LOL! Good argument. So I win. Gotcha, had fun.
So basically what are you complaining about? The game isn't done, like all other games you can't play, only difference being that they're allowing people to play alpha builds of the game as they're creating it.
So what are they doing wrong other than not meeting release dates of a much smaller idea of a game two years ago that all of you seem to hold on to as your only negative point? Outside this, if you actually paid attention, you'd know they have a ton done and are getting more done all the time. Do you need a link to their YouTube channel where they have multiple weekly updates and interviews and behind the scenes footage?
I subscribe to the newsletter and occasionally look at the roadmap when it seems like they've made some big changes. I do love rolling my eyes every time they introduce a new ship that people can buy. Just adding more shit to the game when they promised to stop the feature creep.
To reiterate something I said earlier: They're four years late on the single player campaign and are still in pre-Alpha with absolutely zero idea of when it will be completed. That is not exactly confidence inspiring.
FearTheCow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 2, 2006
- Messages
- 6,678
Someone has a nice progress tracker on SC, I believe they are currently at 10% of what was promised.
So they had planned on having the single player done and release two years after the Kickstarter December of 2012? I didn't know this, can you find me a source? Also, as I'm sure you're aware since you seem to a developer yourself and know all the in's and out's, things change, features are added, more money = more things that can be done, ideas expand...goals expanded, release dates change. I'm sure you view all developers with such a strong and stern hand as well since they've ALL been wrong about release dates at certain points, isn't that right?
I was also unaware that they have absolutely zero idea of when the game will be completely besides the publicly available roadmap. Do you have sources for this or are you also getting this from the same thing you sit with? What isn't confidence inspiring are the people here pulling out excuses that are no longer relevant and that choose to make up stuff and inject their own opinions with nothing to actually back them.
In what the alpha or current over all progress with everything they have in studio?
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,356
The difference is Star Citizen is being crowd funded, to the tune of a few hundred million (I stopped following how much). And progress has been fairly slow and the TOS changes are fairly concerning.
Every time I open the news letter or watch videos I am thoroughly unimpressed with their progress. Just about everything looks terrible and entirely uninteresting from a gameplay perspective. They're making progress, but so far nothing towards a cohesive experience seems to be coming along anytime soon. Until it does, practically no one will speak highly of it. They're actively taking pledges and until that money turns into a cohesive game experience people will talk poorly of it. Almost every time I open the newsletter (I don't open each and every one) I see something about a new ship to buy, or a new in game thing to buy. That is concerning, because the more people own paid content the harder it will be to balance in the final product when items are supposed to be earned in game.
Yeah and look at all they're doing with it.
Has it though? Based on what?
Sooo...not your type of game then? What would you prefer to see? Everything they've shown so far is cut from the same cloth so are you expecting the game to take a turn more towards your liking for some reason?
Based on the PTU this hasn't been true for a while now.
Might be off by a year, but I seem to recall their original plan was 2014 for what became Squadron 42. If it was 2015 then three years is a bit better, but still pretty dang late to still be in the pre-Alpha stage. When a game is multiple years late with no end in sight then I'd say people have a right to get up in arms about it and demand answers. The problem with the expanding ideas and goals is that SC has ballooned into a monster that might very well be impossible to pull off. They spent years seemingly doing little except fucking about and promising the moon and only recently have stated to make anything resembling big strides. How many features in 3.0 were promised two+ years prior to that update? They seem to have been managing their feature releases better since then, but they are a very very very long way from everything being done.
I've yet to see any ETA on when the single-player will be done. CIG isn't promising release dates (which is probably smart) last I checked.
By the way, the "if you're not a X you can't criticize" argument is a massive fallacy and shows a weakness in your ability to formulate a meaningful counter-argument. I'm not a developer, but I actually listen and pay attention when people that actually know what they're talking about have something to say on software. I've picked up enough over the years to look at the huge list of promised features for SC and go "That seems...Unlikely". I'd love to be wrong, but until there is definitive proof that I am I will remain skeptical and continue to be bemused by people that find blind loyalty to any company to be a good idea.
Fading Phoenix
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2006
- Messages
- 602
The sources are no longer available, but I do remember it was originally planned for 2014. This is after it was split into a separate game that was to be purchased individually from Star Citizen, but before it was split into three chapters. It later turned into the first chapter would be delivered in early 2015.
Reddit thread.
http://www.twitch.tv/geekdomo/b/519001941?t=11m13s
April 11, 2014
Erin Roberts: For the first chapter [of Squadron 42], we're aiming for it to be towards the beginning of [2015].
And just as a bonus from yarrmepirate on that reddit thread:
"The official RSI website still has 2015 as the release date.
Coming up in 2015, we will launch the FPS module, multicrew ships, the initial planetside/social experience and the first episode of the Squadron 42 single player adventure!"
Multiple edits: fixed reddit link and added quote.
You mean a game that's been evolving and been having more added to it with more staff and developers and engineers and more money to do more with? I don't call that late...I call that making it the game they WANT to make. Games are pushed out early and incomplete because of publishers forcing it and putting pressure and deadlines THEY make up. Star Citizen doesn't have this, they're taking THEIR time and making THEIR rules.
Except to those of us that have followed development even half-assedly. It's easy to say that if all you want to focus on is the alpha.
No, making stuff up to fit your argument is a fallacy and shows that you really don't have any meaningful comments other than just wanting to be negative towards a game that's, literally, doing what's never been done before.
Maybe I'm wrong, who knows, but I'm certainly not going to just make shit up to make me look like I'm right.
This is all well and good. Again, I haven't denied anywhere that they've missed dates or set dates without really knowing if they'd hold true. I do know that the game they were working on has changed vastly and I don't feel bad for it. I think it was dumb of Chris to set dates when anyone knew it most likely wouldn't happen. Even games that are a fraction of the scale of this one still take longer than 2-3 years to make. I've never said otherwise...I still don't see how harping on this one mistake somehow makes the game a scam or the developer incompetent. Every single developer and publisher has done equal...or worse...it's a fact of life. Especially a fact of life when it comes to a game that we're being shown every developmental step along the way.
At first I thought this post was entirely sarcastic until I read the follow up posts you made. So here we go............
Revolutionary? I wouldn't necessarily say that. It's basically an FPS / MMO hybrid that's built in the least efficient way possible. I would say its evolutionary, but keep in mind we aren't talking about a game. We have a glorified tech demo and some playable pre-alpha game content. So it isn't even a game really. It's also a giant cluster fuck that's been mismanaged from day one. As for doing more from a technological perspective, how so? Newtonian physics have been done before. Procedural environments have been done before. The game engine was developed by Crytek and then modified by Amazon to create Lumberyard. So that isn't an innovation of CIG either. Being able to traverse space to planet's surface without loading screens? Check again. It's been done. The shooter mechanics and many other game play elements are entirely derivative of the FPS genre.
CIG isn't meeting it's goals. Squadron 42 is YEARS late. Other milestones and the game as a whole are also years behind schedule.
Actually, this is something I can agree with. People are enjoying some of the existing content. I've enjoyed what I've played, although its very little content given the amount of time the "game" has been under development. There is certainly potential here, but again this is a cluster fuck and the writing's been on the wall for some time.
I don't think it started out as a scam. I think CIG and Chris Roberts set out to do everything stated in the various Kickstarter videos and everything that was said since. However, having unfettered access to that kind of money without real accountability has made people do stupid things. Its been a problem in the financial industry for decades. They've got regulations and a higher degree of accountability with more added over the years to try and keep more people honest. That still hasn't stopped people with high levels of authority from creating Ponzi-schemes out of legitimate businesses. The thing is, it works so long as you can keep getting influxes of cash. In this case, when CIG fails to put out enough product to lure funding, the golden cow will dry up and this shit will fall apart. Unlike financial institutions, the Kickstarter project didn't have to give backers anything back in return legally.
The video updates don't mean a goddamn thing. Back when I worked at the Art Institute, I saw students throw together 3 or 4 minute videos where they modeled, animated, textured, and created audio all themselves in 11 weeks or less. That content is meaningless until its in the game. Not all the shit shown has been included in the updates. Until it is, it could very well be a smoke screen to try and lure funding from potential backers. That's why they are so vocal about progress despite the fact that the "game" as you put it is in such a raw state after half a decade or more of development.
I wouldn't throw stones if you are seriously defending this clusterfuck.
You actually did call him a fanatic, but specifics aside that's the entire problem with these discussions; every SC thread is inundated with unmitigated, biased, and toxic vitriol. Any positive comments about the game are met with accusations of fanaticism, ignorance, and gullibility and all the insults and derogatory language to go along with them. It's scam and everyone who tries to defend it is part of a cult. The funny thing is cults don't rely too much on evidence. In fact, they tend to do everything they can to avoid being confronted by anything that might challenge their views. So I have to wonder, when someone links to actual, concrete evidence (as Mut1ny did above) to dispel many of the inaccuracies and misconceptions about SC, do you look at any of it or do you purposely avoid it? What's available on their Youtube channel and as a playable game has significant implications for arguments made by decriers of SC, and yet we keep seeing the same absurd, illogical arguments.
"It's a scam" is not an evidence-based position. That makes it inherently unreasonable and untenable. The earth is round, evolution is real, we've been to the moon, vaccines are safe, and SC is a game that is being developed. The evidence exists; plugging your ears and humming loudly doesn't change reality.
Making the game they want does not absolve them from criticism for being years late. And. yes, they are late. They made a promise, they failed to keep it. They continued to fail to keep their promises until they decided to stop making them. All you are doing is making excuses. It is THEIR fault for getting overloaded with feature creep and THEIR fault for not just sticking with what they originally promised in the Kickstarter.
What have I made up exactly? You were the one claiming that features that did not yet exist or were not yet complete were available in a game. All you've done is blather on mindlessly without actually providing a shred of evidence to counter anything I've said. Also, it's cute how you try to remove the positive things I've said in order to try and craft your own narrative of what is happening. Sorry dude, that doesn't work when anyone looking at the thread can see everything I've said. What's next? Are you going to try and alter things you quote from me in order to try and make it look like I'm trying to frame my opinions as fact?
they should stop all donations and funding as a gesture of good faith...I mean how much $$ do they actually need for this...this must be the most expensive game of all time at this point...the more people donate the more features they keep retro-adding...it'll never end if they continue to collect $$
It's getting there. At 189m it surpassed GTA5's production budget and is creeping up on SW: TOR's $200m (estimated) production cost. Around the 4th spot if you take marketing budgets into account. With marketing included, GTAV sits at the top with $278m. Though, TOR might be even higher, but there is no data on how much EA spent marketing that one.
It's not the most expensive game ever by a long shot. For example: EA/BioWare's Star Wars: The Old Republic is still more expensive than Star-Ponzi has been so far with a production budget said to have reached the 200 million dollar mark before marketing. When you add in marketing costs, Grand Theft Auto V was something like 278 million dollars. CoD:MW2 was 288 million. Star-Ponzi could be the most expensive given where it is and how much money it may need to finish it at this point. Whether or not it will ever cross the finish line is certainly debatable.
ChoGGi
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,914
Kind of like Duke Nukem Forever
wow MW2's marketing costs were 4 times its development costs?...is that normal?...I don't think it works that way with movies as most non-indie titles cost more in production then marketing
There's irony somewhere in here...
Kind of like Duke Nukem Forever
After several developers...how many hands has Star Citizen passed through, I forget.
- Status