3 ms·

When you say "expectations have been met", did you expect the game to take this long to develop? Looking at the original kickstarter from 2012 https://www.kick

When you say "expectations have been met", did you expect the game to take this long to develop? Looking at the original kickstarter from 2012 https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen?ref=nav_search&result=project&term=star%20citizen https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen?ref=na... it looks like the original ship date was Nov 2014, so it seems that at least some people's expectations aren't likely to have been met.

mrlala 8y ago
That's not too bad, it's only like 0.25 Valves late, could be worse!
yifanl 8y ago
My understanding is that Star Citizen ran into an insane amount of both feature and scope creep. Of course, at its core, it's a game about space exploration, so I can understand just how vast that would be at an abstract level, but trying to implement a 1-to-1 of that is just absurd to me.
lykr0n 8y ago
I knew when I got involved I was putting money into a black box. I was (and still am) enthralled with the idea Chris Roberts has presented. When I was able to jump into a ship and play Area Commander with other People, I felt like what I signed up for was delivered. But, I'm excited with what else is coming. And honestly, I'm glad. If they had just stuck to the initial scope, it would be less exciting. I'd rather dream big and be let down versus not have the chance to dream in the first place. I've backed some kickstarter projects that did what I signed up for, and awesome. I've also backed some projects that got widely popular and the people decided to increase the scope of what they were trying to do. Some of them worked, some of them didn't, and some looks like they are going to. I'm not sure which is better, but for me I lean towards "let's try to do awesome." EDIT. A point I wanted to share is that you also need to quantify enjoyment and wow factor. I've seen things come out of Star Citizen that make me feel like a kid again. They have done some awesome stuff in terms of visuals and engineering. I would still love to have a finished project, but from what I've played and seen already, I would not be overly disappointed if the game disappeared tomorrow. I've enjoyed the journey, and will continue to enjoy it. That has to count for something. I'm not saying I don't expect a full game to come, I do.
- raesene9 8y ago
  Enjoyment is always subjective and if you feel that you've got appropriate levels of enjoyment for the money you've spent then it obviously works for you.
wavefunction 8y ago
The original kickstarter scope was: you are your space ship and you will be able to fight and do some trading of resources. The scope has increased a great deal since then but I feel like the time it's taken to develop is reasonable. I will say they wasted a year or two at the beginning trying to set up an AAA studio from scratch and mis-partenering with the wrong sub-contractors. And maybe the scope could have been limited with some of the functionality to come later. Right now backers are testing out space mining mechanics and the game is already pretty fun imo.

mrlala 8y ago

That's not too bad, it's only like 0.25 Valves late, could be worse!

yifanl 8y ago

My understanding is that Star Citizen ran into an insane amount of both feature and scope creep. Of course, at its core, it's a game about space exploration, so I can understand just how vast that would be at an abstract level, but trying to implement a 1-to-1 of that is just absurd to me.

lykr0n 8y ago

I knew when I got involved I was putting money into a black box. I was (and still am) enthralled with the idea Chris Roberts has presented. When I was able to jump into a ship and play Area Commander with other People, I felt like what I signed up for was delivered. But, I'm excited with what else is coming. And honestly, I'm glad. If they had just stuck to the initial scope, it would be less exciting. I'd rather dream big and be let down versus not have the chance to dream in the first place. I've backed some kickstarter projects that did what I signed up for, and awesome. I've also backed some projects that got widely popular and the people decided to increase the scope of what they were trying to do. Some of them worked, some of them didn't, and some looks like they are going to. I'm not sure which is better, but for me I lean towards "let's try to do awesome." EDIT. A point I wanted to share is that you also need to quantify enjoyment and wow factor. I've seen things come out of Star Citizen that make me feel like a kid again. They have done some awesome stuff in terms of visuals and engineering. I would still love to have a finished project, but from what I've played and seen already, I would not be overly disappointed if the game disappeared tomorrow. I've enjoyed the journey, and will continue to enjoy it. That has to count for something. I'm not saying I don't expect a full game to come, I do.

raesene9 8y ago
Enjoyment is always subjective and if you feel that you've got appropriate levels of enjoyment for the money you've spent then it obviously works for you.

wavefunction 8y ago

The original kickstarter scope was: you are your space ship and you will be able to fight and do some trading of resources. The scope has increased a great deal since then but I feel like the time it's taken to develop is reasonable. I will say they wasted a year or two at the beginning trying to set up an AAA studio from scratch and mis-partenering with the wrong sub-contractors. And maybe the scope could have been limited with some of the functionality to come later. Right now backers are testing out space mining mechanics and the game is already pretty fun imo.