![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Star Citizen Squadron 42 Delayed
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,898
I expect it next year. If not, then I'll start getting a bit pissy. Unlike the "hurrdurrsomanymillionsandnogame" troglodytes, I understand that development takes time. And yes, they DO have a lot to show for it. That said, the core tech is nearing completion (and is really fucking impressive, tbh), so if it takes longer than another year to get 42 out the door I'll have to question what exactly is causing the holdup. I expect the bulk of SC to be done in that timeframe as well, certainly enough of it to be quite playable and enjoyable.
At any rate, I've had as much fun following development and getting a peak at all these systems as they've come together as I think I'll have playing the game(s), so... no complaints. Yet.
DrLobotomy
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 19, 2016
- Messages
- 6,736
$127 million?? They should have some actual space equipment to launch in south Florida by now!!
You'd be surprised. Games like Assassins Creed and GTAV are 200-300M projects now. It's kind of crazy. Games that nearly take the GDP of a 3rd world country to produce.
I'm putting the S42 release at sometime after mid next year. That was always my guess. We will know we are getting close when we actually see some combined story and gameplay footage.
I'm putting the S42 release at sometime after mid next year. That was always my guess. We will know we are getting close when we actually see some combined story and gameplay footage.
No but they certainly got a fleet of limited edition Porsches.
DeathFromBelow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
- Messages
- 7,315
I can't wait to play this on my Phantom game console.
IcePickFreak
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2010
- Messages
- 1,714
I love the optimism. This is finally the pre-order/"donation" that's going to pan out and live up to expectations! Just you wait and see!
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,036
It's funny that you'd mention not understanding. Then CI understands even less as they promised a 2014 release date for SQ42 and 2015 for the persistent universe if I remember correctly. There are only two options really. They were lying about the dates on purpose to boost funding or they went into development with a childlike naivety. I don't know which is worse.
The only thing readily apparent is that some people still have the audacity to shill for them after they blew 4 years (or is it five now?) and 100 million and the only thing they can show for it is two pre-alpha "modules" as they call it.
Vercinaigh
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2008
- Messages
- 849
Most of that money is spent on advertising/marketing. Fact, this information is readily available. most of your big AAA titles spend 75%+ of their budget in those areas now. None spend that kind of money on the game, not even close. And those that do, do so questionably.
List of most expensive video games to develop - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For some reason I think that represents quite a few users on here.
Agreed but that doesn't make it any less true. There are also quite a few that will blindly defend this game no matter what so I guess it all evens out.
Someone should edit that wiki post cause Star Citizen isn't gonna make a 2016 release window lol
Those hardline opinions come from the fact that they met their financial goals many times over, then still felt it necessary to make the game pay 2 win by selling in game content. Couple that with endless delays on even the smallest parts of the game and I'm sorry it is difficult if not impossible to defend them without doing mental gymnastics.
This game Wreaks of fraud and mismanagement.
Well that's pretty obvious. Those that are skeptical of this project are the most likely to comment on the constant delays. The thing is that most of us who do this, want it to succeed. It's just hard to buy into a project that is this far behind, is the 6th most expensive game in history and is still collecting money.For some reason I think that represents quite a few users on here.
defaultluser
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2006
- Messages
- 14,398
The problem Star Citizen has versus other AAA games is that Chris Roberts didn't put any effort into developing ANY of the tech behind the game before he made the pitch. In addition, he fucked-up by pitching the "final product" with an aggressive time-frame you might see at a AAA studio (that already has engine and basic toolset developed, AND a pool of developers to tap).
Chris Roberts is in the running to win the biggest douche in the universe award for making these deceptive schedule claims and milking idiots for tens of millions. But if people continue to toss him millions each month, there will eventually be a game. In 2019.
Chris Roberts is in the running to win the biggest douche in the universe award for making these deceptive schedule claims and milking idiots for tens of millions. But if people continue to toss him millions each month, there will eventually be a game. In 2019.
Correct, I have never once said I wanted this game to fail. I don't see how that would benefit any gamer or give them pleasure to see it fail.
Bingo. Any self-respecting PC Gamer wants nothing more than a definitive PC Master Race title. Why not? And if Star Citizen managed to pull off even half of what was promised, it would probably be that title. But Chris Roberts is a buffoon with such a trail of failed and outright mismanaged projects that of course skepticism is going to be sky high.
The only hope for Star Citizen in terms of a "finished product" could only happen in spite of Roberts, not because of him. Like all his previous projects, he'd have to someone be forcibly removed (along with his fake actress wife) and someone else step in to rescue the damn thing.
And let's face it, it's just plain fun to get the cultist sycophants riled up.
Vercinaigh
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2008
- Messages
- 849
True story.
plus you are ignoring the overhead also. Rock star didn't have to build a building, buy equipment, build everything from scratch. So you can probably knock off about 1/3 of that just getting set up. Then the trial and error stages of not having multiple of these games under their belt so trying to see what will and won't work as opposed to say Assassin's Creed 7 where they have 9+ games behind them to work from. Or GTA 6 where again they have lots of previous games to have learned from. And yet the quality of what they have shown is great looking.
Which is why you start off building the significantly smaller original game. Deliver it. Then take the money you get (assuming more people buy it) to build your next game. Or alternatively, you have another kickstarter for the 2nd game...or both.
I might feel differently if they weren't selling ships for a thousand dollar (10k?). I hope it all works out, but it wreaks of a Ponzi scheme or a large scale version of what happened at Zidware pinball.
You can sit there and rationalize this all you want, but they've collected significantly more than they said they needed. They constantly collect more money then expand the scope, then collect more money, then expand the scope and miss deadline after deadline. Eventually the money is going to dry up and unless they have an incredible game before that happens, the entire project will fall apart.
I wish he'd just made the Privateer/WC type game he originally described.
They went into with no idea what is required to build a modern engine only really designers who knew how to make a fun game over a decade ago... so definitely child like understanding of modern systems. That said they are able to toss concepts that say it has to look this way because it has always been done that way because they were the guys that used to do it another way years before, and some of the methods that were used between hardware texture and lighting and UE4 are reallllllly inefficient. Like uniform edge flow because the zphere you sculpted on had uniform edge flow then not understand what the engine blows a gasket rendering it. Normal maps are textures that sit on uv coords on geomety in xyz space if you assume that all space is full of data then compressing that data is very hard. If you assume that all space is empty compressing it is easy but you lose the information. Most detail comes from light bouncing on the surface be it a normal map bending the normals of objects in xyz space or the normals of objects in xyz space but the goal to seek is building objects so that the silhouette is understandable without any texture budget so that you can add details that work in every direction they are looked at in. Normal maps are pain to retouch because your brushes have to have the certain colors to control the shape, or you have to take it back into zbrush and mudbox which may not react the same way your engine does and do not attempt to illuminate more than the clip plane.
The only weird thing about the ship demo is the scale... everything felt about 3/4 size but you see the buildings are the correct scale to each other when the artist goes in a places them... so that may just be so the engine runs because as long as you only objects of reference are all scaled correctly you can not tell how far away something is in the distance. That is why holly wood used scale models.
Really the best way to look at this is Warhammer Online Age of Reckoning... it cost a staggering amount of money and still failed. It was fun. It launched but they did not make enough money to cover expenses. They had five publishes in five different regions that took a chunk of the profits... before the losses were calculated... rdi just has to get a good game out before they run out of money to continue developing it. When I was at activision blizzard as a qa tester on modern warfare three I got to hang out with some of the developers because I was working on the project and knew them outside of work. So we made jokes about the game and the industry. The one thing beside meeting one of my more silly female friends there, was that everyone working on the game had an option to buy a wow sub cheap, I already had a sub but the point was that most of developers played because it was fun and they thought they were getting a good deal. People want value for their money. Really that is all any company has to delver. Smart company's balance added value verse profit but always manage to delver something that people want for their money.
I imagine it'll be a win-win for me , if they release a PU whenever , close to their promises and it works well , I'll get a fun space multiplayer game to play.
If it goes NMS route , it'll be an epic shit-storm of drama and hilarity. It'll be Vanguard parking lot firing by McQuaid and NMS Sean Murray all rolled into one x10 , and provide enough reading entertainment to last for months and months.
If it goes NMS route , it'll be an epic shit-storm of drama and hilarity. It'll be Vanguard parking lot firing by McQuaid and NMS Sean Murray all rolled into one x10 , and provide enough reading entertainment to last for months and months.
Then perhaps they shouldn't have had 40+ stretch goals for every million dollar milestone?
As others have said, we wanted a solid base game. Additions to that game could have come later and would have been welcomed. Instead we have what appears to not only be a game stuck in development hell, but also design hell. And that's not even getting into the issue of them selling more and more ships that they haven't even skinned or modeled yet to continue raising cash with little to actually show for it. We want a big ass space sim with a billion features, but we don't want what appears to be the game industry equivalent of Enron.
Did they ever get Vanguard working? I tried the beta (or RC...whatever) and it was so slow it was unplayable, unless you tunred the graphics down to the point that it looked like shit.
Palladium@SG
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2015
- Messages
- 283
"It's not finished until we get the underlying quantum mechanics, DNA replication and space-baby gestation simulation correct, because REALISM"