5 ms·

Have you played the game? I ask because you sound exactly like one of the people complaining because they can't for some reason handle how the game is develope

Have you played the game? I ask because you sound exactly like one of the people complaining because they can't for some reason handle how the game is developed, that its not going according to your expectations. If you don't plan to play Star Citizen, then why do you care how Star Citizen players feel about the game? CIG has been very clear from the start that Star Citizen's development will be unlike any other game before it, and they have been especially clear and emphasized that "it will be done when it's done".

mattmanser 8y ago
What game? I had a go of a tech demo at some point. It was awful. Look at the thread, people in there believed SQ42 was almost finished. That was 2 years ago! CIG were giving the impression that they'd almost done the single player campaign, now they're talking about 2020. A possible scenario at this point is that they burn through all the cash and the game is put out either unfinished or never sees light of day. Maybe a great game will come out of this, but it's perfectly reasonable to believe that's doubtful.
- fapjacks 8y ago
  Oh, so your problem with the game is after all that it's not going according to your worldview. I don't suppose it would help for me to suggest one more time that CIG has been clear about "done when it's done" since the beginning? It's almost like that last sentence is completely invisible to everyone complaining about the release date. If you don't like it, go ahead and stick to your loot boxes and microtransactions and "ship it" and season pass titles you're used to. And let people enjoy things.
  - danso 8y ago
    CIG repeatedly promised, on their sites and promo videos, that SQ42 would be launching in 2016. You can argue that what they’re doing with SC is unprecedented, and SQ42 is dependent on them. But it wasn’t CIG themselves that were adamant on the 2016 release date.
    - fapjacks 8y ago
      Well, that's completely false. Neither Chris Roberts nor CIG have ever "promised" a release date. Even in the Kickstarter it was an estimate. They have been totally transparent about that from the start. Stop spreading lies.
      - sroya 8y ago
        http://media.kotaku.foxtrot.future.net.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2016/10/squadron-42-2016-release-date.png http://media.kotaku.foxtrot.future.net.uk/wp-content/uploads...
      - wlesieutre 8y ago
        It was “2016 - Answer the Call”, then it changed to 2017, then it dropped the date entirely. https://goo.gl/images/cib7Dn https://goo.gl/images/cib7Dn I’m as excited about it as the next guy but let’s not pretend it hasn’t been delayed repeatedly.
      - danso 8y ago
        Maybe you should pay attention to the campaign. A simple search on Google or r/starcitizen has all the evidence you need. In fact, SQ42 was promised as early as Fall 2015 (with SC having its commercial launch in 2016) in CIG's own slidedeck [0], but I remember the 2016 promise being memorable because they didn't change it even into 2017. https://www.gamespot.com/articles/star-citizen-release-schedule-dates-fps-mode-and-s/1100-6424807/ https://www.gamespot.com/articles/star-citizen-release-sched...
        mynameisvlad 8y ago
        No, you don't understand. They didn't explicitly use the word "promise" so it can't be a promise. At least, that's how parent commenter thinks the world works.
      - atombender 8y ago
        You keep attacking the use of the "promise". I don't know if English is your first language, but people making this claim in the thread aren't using the word in the sense of a pinky promise. They don't need to say "we promise to ship this, for real!" If a game developer says a game will launch in 2016 and provides publicity material such as posters implying this fact, then they are "promising". If I tell you that I will follow up on an email you sent me, I've made you a promise; if you set an expectation, you've made a promise to someone. For the record, I've only heard of Star Citizen and never funded it, played it or engaged with the community.
  - mattmanser 8y ago
    I'm not engaging with you any further, as I said I have no skin in the game, but you're clearly suffering from a sunk-cost fallacy. It's hard to talk sense to a fanatic who's too invested to realize they should stop spending already. Personally I love Indies, and can enjoy unpolished games (check out Kenshi, game of the year for me!). But watching Star citizen unfold is like watching an extremely slow motion car wreck. I almost invested in the KS, I'm really glad I didn't.
    - zamalek 8y ago
      The problem is that you're in another echo chamber. If you took a step back and had a look at what CIG have done as of December 2019, instead of the old build that the Derek Smart echo chamber is harping on about, you'd see that there is actually a game there. While there is still room for concern, "no game at all" is patently false and has been for more than a year. > But watching Star citizen unfold But you clearly haven't been watching it.
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  I would be shocked if it "never sees the light of day" at this point, just due to the amount of invested resources. Even if CIG had lost the Crytek lawsuit and had to pay up a mass sum or go under, or if they run out of money in the future, someone would probably pick it up for cheap (as Microsoft once did with a previous Chris Roberts title) and wrap it up into a nice bow.
- iamtom 8y ago
  Their recently released financial accounting is all the evidence needed to show that not only was Derek Smart right when he claimed in July 2015 that the game could never be made for $150M (they had raised $85M at the time), but also that it could never been made as has been pitched by Chris Roberts. https://cloudimperiumgames.com/blog/corporate/cfo-comment-2012-2017-financials https://cloudimperiumgames.com/blog/corporate/cfo-comment-20... Right now Star Citizen is barely a proof-of-concept tech demo, while Squadron 42 which was coming in 2014, is still almost 2 years away from BETA. After blowing through $200 million of backer money, in May 2015 they sold 10% of the company to an off-shore investor for $46M to continue funding development. And Derek Smart was the first to leak that info as well, and almost a full week before CIG made it public that this was in the works since May 2018 (when Derek Smart first leaked that something was in the works). http://dereksmart.com/forums/reply/6792/ http://dereksmart.com/forums/reply/6792/
raesene9 8y ago
It'll be done when it's done is, unfortunately a common thing said when people are late. Looking at the original kickstarter page https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen there's pledges of a finished product in 2014, so it doesn't feel unreasonable for people to say that it's late.
- fapjacks 8y ago
  It's always been an estimate, and they've always been crystal clear about the process and releasing new estimates. If you haven't pledged, you aren't receiving the incredible amount of updates from almost every team at CIG. In the past week I have received seven Star Citizen-related emails. There are about two or three videos from CIG uploaded to Youtube every week. If you didn't pledge, you don't see that. You just see whining on Reddit. And again, as someone that's put a ton of money into development, and who is pleased with the state and direction of the game, I hope this isn't released in the next two years. Or the next four. Or however many years before "it's done", because I actually did fund the game, and I went into the Kickstarter expecting to fund Chris Roberts' magnum opus. And that's what I'll wait for, as the person who's put two orders of magnitude more money into it than your average kid whining about it on Reddit.
  - raesene9 8y ago
    I've just read all the way through the kickstarter page where SC raised it's first $2m dollars (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen) in 2012. In there they very clearly commit to delivering the game in specific timelines, nowhere that I can find does it say "it'll be done when it's done" or "this is an estimated time it could be much later" Perhaps I'm missing where the page that backers used to decide whether to commit to the project says that their timelines are an estimate...
  - lasagnaphil 8y ago
    It seems like the content for Star Citizen is not the actual game, but the various updates surrounding it. And fans seem to have a good time enjoying those updates, up to the point that the actual finishing of the physical "game" is becoming irrelevant. So I like to think of Star Citizen fans not as conventional video game fans but as Youtube subscribers paying for the update videos and the occasional kool demo...
Ralfp 8y ago
But people are very much in right to have negative opinion on how game is being managed and developed. That's what healthy discussion is about: inviting critical opinions. I've missed the point when fanbase became fiercely defensive of SC, but it's crazy how quickly reaction to any criticism of the game is to shut down that criticism. Saying that "Chris Robets said in advance that game will be developed differently" is not some sort of "get out of the jail card" for criticizing them for ballooning the game out of scope. It's actually crazy how far some people are putting in "for defense of a dream". I once saw a comment under the article about SC which's author was berating the site for not knowing what they are writing about and telling them to shut it. Because comment was made using facebook comments, I've decided to follow the link to Facebook profile for my own curiosity. His Facebook profile was literally those things: - Intro was I am 64 years old retiree living somewhere. I am participating in creation of Star Citizen video game and love it! - Wall was usual posts with photos of relatives, family meetings, travels and shares of StarCitizen news/commentaries It's absolutely nuts!
- fapjacks 8y ago
  Nice, accusing the people you disagree with of being bot accounts. That's quite classy.
  - Ralfp 8y ago
    If this is how you've understood my message, I guess it proves my point of how unreasonable some of SC fans are in discussions, seeking conspiracies everywhere.

mattmanser 8y ago

What game? I had a go of a tech demo at some point. It was awful. Look at the thread, people in there believed SQ42 was almost finished. That was 2 years ago! CIG were giving the impression that they'd almost done the single player campaign, now they're talking about 2020. A possible scenario at this point is that they burn through all the cash and the game is put out either unfinished or never sees light of day. Maybe a great game will come out of this, but it's perfectly reasonable to believe that's doubtful.

fapjacks 8y ago
Oh, so your problem with the game is after all that it's not going according to your worldview. I don't suppose it would help for me to suggest one more time that CIG has been clear about "done when it's done" since the beginning? It's almost like that last sentence is completely invisible to everyone complaining about the release date. If you don't like it, go ahead and stick to your loot boxes and microtransactions and "ship it" and season pass titles you're used to. And let people enjoy things.
- danso 8y ago
  CIG repeatedly promised, on their sites and promo videos, that SQ42 would be launching in 2016. You can argue that what they’re doing with SC is unprecedented, and SQ42 is dependent on them. But it wasn’t CIG themselves that were adamant on the 2016 release date.
  - fapjacks 8y ago
    Well, that's completely false. Neither Chris Roberts nor CIG have ever "promised" a release date. Even in the Kickstarter it was an estimate. They have been totally transparent about that from the start. Stop spreading lies.
    - sroya 8y ago
      http://media.kotaku.foxtrot.future.net.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2016/10/squadron-42-2016-release-date.png http://media.kotaku.foxtrot.future.net.uk/wp-content/uploads...
    - wlesieutre 8y ago
      It was “2016 - Answer the Call”, then it changed to 2017, then it dropped the date entirely. https://goo.gl/images/cib7Dn https://goo.gl/images/cib7Dn I’m as excited about it as the next guy but let’s not pretend it hasn’t been delayed repeatedly.
    - danso 8y ago
      Maybe you should pay attention to the campaign. A simple search on Google or r/starcitizen has all the evidence you need. In fact, SQ42 was promised as early as Fall 2015 (with SC having its commercial launch in 2016) in CIG's own slidedeck [0], but I remember the 2016 promise being memorable because they didn't change it even into 2017. https://www.gamespot.com/articles/star-citizen-release-schedule-dates-fps-mode-and-s/1100-6424807/ https://www.gamespot.com/articles/star-citizen-release-sched...
      - mynameisvlad 8y ago
        No, you don't understand. They didn't explicitly use the word "promise" so it can't be a promise. At least, that's how parent commenter thinks the world works.
    - atombender 8y ago
      You keep attacking the use of the "promise". I don't know if English is your first language, but people making this claim in the thread aren't using the word in the sense of a pinky promise. They don't need to say "we promise to ship this, for real!" If a game developer says a game will launch in 2016 and provides publicity material such as posters implying this fact, then they are "promising". If I tell you that I will follow up on an email you sent me, I've made you a promise; if you set an expectation, you've made a promise to someone. For the record, I've only heard of Star Citizen and never funded it, played it or engaged with the community.
- mattmanser 8y ago
  I'm not engaging with you any further, as I said I have no skin in the game, but you're clearly suffering from a sunk-cost fallacy. It's hard to talk sense to a fanatic who's too invested to realize they should stop spending already. Personally I love Indies, and can enjoy unpolished games (check out Kenshi, game of the year for me!). But watching Star citizen unfold is like watching an extremely slow motion car wreck. I almost invested in the KS, I'm really glad I didn't.
  - zamalek 8y ago
    The problem is that you're in another echo chamber. If you took a step back and had a look at what CIG have done as of December 2019, instead of the old build that the Derek Smart echo chamber is harping on about, you'd see that there is actually a game there. While there is still room for concern, "no game at all" is patently false and has been for more than a year. > But watching Star citizen unfold But you clearly haven't been watching it.
ocdtrekkie 8y ago
I would be shocked if it "never sees the light of day" at this point, just due to the amount of invested resources. Even if CIG had lost the Crytek lawsuit and had to pay up a mass sum or go under, or if they run out of money in the future, someone would probably pick it up for cheap (as Microsoft once did with a previous Chris Roberts title) and wrap it up into a nice bow.
iamtom 8y ago
Their recently released financial accounting is all the evidence needed to show that not only was Derek Smart right when he claimed in July 2015 that the game could never be made for $150M (they had raised $85M at the time), but also that it could never been made as has been pitched by Chris Roberts. https://cloudimperiumgames.com/blog/corporate/cfo-comment-2012-2017-financials https://cloudimperiumgames.com/blog/corporate/cfo-comment-20... Right now Star Citizen is barely a proof-of-concept tech demo, while Squadron 42 which was coming in 2014, is still almost 2 years away from BETA. After blowing through $200 million of backer money, in May 2015 they sold 10% of the company to an off-shore investor for $46M to continue funding development. And Derek Smart was the first to leak that info as well, and almost a full week before CIG made it public that this was in the works since May 2018 (when Derek Smart first leaked that something was in the works). http://dereksmart.com/forums/reply/6792/ http://dereksmart.com/forums/reply/6792/

raesene9 8y ago

It'll be done when it's done is, unfortunately a common thing said when people are late. Looking at the original kickstarter page https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen there's pledges of a finished product in 2014, so it doesn't feel unreasonable for people to say that it's late.

fapjacks 8y ago
It's always been an estimate, and they've always been crystal clear about the process and releasing new estimates. If you haven't pledged, you aren't receiving the incredible amount of updates from almost every team at CIG. In the past week I have received seven Star Citizen-related emails. There are about two or three videos from CIG uploaded to Youtube every week. If you didn't pledge, you don't see that. You just see whining on Reddit. And again, as someone that's put a ton of money into development, and who is pleased with the state and direction of the game, I hope this isn't released in the next two years. Or the next four. Or however many years before "it's done", because I actually did fund the game, and I went into the Kickstarter expecting to fund Chris Roberts' magnum opus. And that's what I'll wait for, as the person who's put two orders of magnitude more money into it than your average kid whining about it on Reddit.
- raesene9 8y ago
  I've just read all the way through the kickstarter page where SC raised it's first $2m dollars (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen) in 2012. In there they very clearly commit to delivering the game in specific timelines, nowhere that I can find does it say "it'll be done when it's done" or "this is an estimated time it could be much later" Perhaps I'm missing where the page that backers used to decide whether to commit to the project says that their timelines are an estimate...
- lasagnaphil 8y ago
  It seems like the content for Star Citizen is not the actual game, but the various updates surrounding it. And fans seem to have a good time enjoying those updates, up to the point that the actual finishing of the physical "game" is becoming irrelevant. So I like to think of Star Citizen fans not as conventional video game fans but as Youtube subscribers paying for the update videos and the occasional kool demo...

Ralfp 8y ago

But people are very much in right to have negative opinion on how game is being managed and developed. That's what healthy discussion is about: inviting critical opinions. I've missed the point when fanbase became fiercely defensive of SC, but it's crazy how quickly reaction to any criticism of the game is to shut down that criticism. Saying that "Chris Robets said in advance that game will be developed differently" is not some sort of "get out of the jail card" for criticizing them for ballooning the game out of scope. It's actually crazy how far some people are putting in "for defense of a dream". I once saw a comment under the article about SC which's author was berating the site for not knowing what they are writing about and telling them to shut it. Because comment was made using facebook comments, I've decided to follow the link to Facebook profile for my own curiosity. His Facebook profile was literally those things: - Intro was I am 64 years old retiree living somewhere. I am participating in creation of Star Citizen video game and love it! - Wall was usual posts with photos of relatives, family meetings, travels and shares of StarCitizen news/commentaries It's absolutely nuts!

fapjacks 8y ago
Nice, accusing the people you disagree with of being bot accounts. That's quite classy.
- Ralfp 8y ago
  If this is how you've understood my message, I guess it proves my point of how unreasonable some of SC fans are in discussions, seeking conspiracies everywhere.