Telefrog
3364
The wrap-up report.
[quote]
It is difficult, after all these months of research and having heard from so many people involved with the project, to seriously entertain the notion that Star Citizen is some kind of intentional scam. Hundreds of people all over the world are working hard on it, and have been for years. Although there have been plenty of scandalous allegations, not one of them has checked out in our research – though of course nobody outside of its management team has full visibility on Cloud Imperium’s finances. If Star Citizen goes down – and it yet might – it will likely be because its sheer scope is out of step with the reality of actually making it, or because the money runs out, or because it’s taken too long and its funders have finally withdrawn their support. If there is anything more nefarious than that going on, we have found no convincing evidence of it.[/quote]
That’s not the point made by many critical of the game(or should I say games at this point essentially). It’s that it was allowed to get that way. They clearly turned into the “kid in the candy store” when the money was flowing in. They had a total lack of management discipline. Instead of sticking just to the original idea they decided they could incorporate every genre of game ever made into one. Now they have this Frankenstein of game. Get the original game up, proving the new team can ship a commercial product then expand.
Still no stake in this (ELITE 4 LYFE), but Derek’s smear campaign was so painful to watch that I had to unfollow him on the Twitters. Which is a shame because he’s still amusing after twenty years of his bullshit.
My hot take: They need to get a credible vertical slice of the persistent universe in people’s hands ASAP, or SQ42 ASAP, or both.
So, here goes: based on all the evidence, I believe there is a decent chance that Star Citizen will make it to some form of release. But I don’t think it will happen within the next couple of years, and by the time it does happen, there’s a chance that other games like Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare and Star Citizen’s great rival Elite Dangerous may well have already given us great versions of the things that Star Citizen is trying to achieve.
I guess I’m not the only one saying that Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous will ultimately have to be compared to see which development strategy worked best. Although I think it’s a stretch to say that E:D is competing with Call of Duty.
Edit: I might have (definitely) misread that last part
You mean, like the current alpha? That (while lacking polish, is pretty much a vertical slice)
Eh, I’d say that 3.0 is looking more to be the vertical slice for the PU. If a vertical slice is feature complete but not content complete, then what we currently have doesn’t really cut it. Alpha 2.5 is missing basic features like cargo hauling, looting, procedurally generated missions, and a simulated economy.
Alpha 3.0 will most notably lack mining and jump points to other systems, but it will include all of the features in the above paragraph. If anything, the Baby PU has thus far been a proof of concept for unified spaceflight/FPS mechanics.
I just wish I could go back in time and convince Chris to make Wing Commander for a new era. Just give us a great Squadron 42 game. All in the cockpit. Well, maybe some walky bits in the command ship or the sake of immersion, but no FPS. Perhaps do some cool stuff with branching missions and choices so it’s not too linear. A silly, jingoistic military storyline with lots of solid pew-pew.
In what sense? Are there multiple careers available, jobs to do, places to explore? All the backers with ships have their ships and you’re all rocking out in a big persistent universe?
Elite on launch day Dec 2014 was at best an alpha, and it had a coherent and wondrous galaxy to explore from day one. Very clunky implementation and very limited game systems by modern standards, but it was a recreation of 1984 Elite and much more. David Braben delivered something I really didn’t think I’d ever see. Chris Roberts has spent a lot of money already, vastly more than Elite cost in its lifetime so far, I’d imagine.
KevinC
3372
That’s not in any way a fair comparison, is it? I mean, given the budgets involved.
The argument from critics is that Chris Roberts should have ended his crowdfunding campaign once he reached his initial goal, released a modest game, and then expanded upon it through paid expansions. So essentially what Elite: Dangerous did.
If Star Citizen comes out in 2020 as people in this thread speculate, but provides a richer experience than Elite: Dangerous does as of that year, then it will serve as a justification for Roberts’ strategy.
No, we were talking about a vertical slice, which does not have to have all content (nor features, btw) just a chunk of them to be a significant sample of the game. A vertical slice of a game like Uncharted is easy to define (one level) but a vertical slice of a multi career MMOish game is much harder. Do you need multiple careers or just one career (one slice of the multiple career system). Vertical slices inmost development pipelines I know of come before alpha, not after (it varies by developer, though). I would certainly define what we have as a (not very polished) vertical slice.
In a way, we don’t even know what the game is supposed to be like at release. Is the current implemented star system too sparse or a good sample of what will be out there at release?
I do agree alpha 3.0 will be closer to what people think of as vertical slice (which is more like an E3 demo, really), and then alpha 4.0 I suppose more so, but if we are looking at a feature complete game, the vertical slice at this moment equals the full game at about what, 25% content? that’s not a vertical slice, that’s a full alpha. (BTW, in some areas, but not many, we have more than 50% announced content completion. More than 50% of the announced ships are already implemented in the game and available).
But anyway, my doubts are not whether they can provide a vertical slice. Many projects fail after an amazing vertical slice. What they are putting out and showing (thinking here of alpha 3.0 and the planetary landings) shows that they have the technical chops and production ability to release the game (eventually). My doubts are more in line of the amount of time it will take them to move from what they have to full content completion. From where I stand it seems the pipeline problem at this moment (with most of the tech ready) is not so much mechanic implementation as content creation and integration. If they are planning 100 star systems, and we assume we are being shown an average system, they might be at 1% of environmental content creation and integration, and that’s a looong way to go. At the current pace I can see game mechanics being ready in a year or two (as long as they keep it simple, and I’m not saying they are going to be engrossing, but they can be there in that timeframe). But the full Persistent Universe, well I don’t see where the process ends at the pace of development they have shown. I’m not sure the project can sustain itself that long.
Of course, they have more stuff ready than what they have shown (there’re at least two or three major hubs already asset ready but not in the alpha that we know of) but even counting with that it looks really daunting.
Wait,why is Kotaku referencing the upcoming Call of Duty as an example of something Star Citizen is trying to achieve? I clearly haven’t been following the press about the game. Does it have space combat? Some sort of persistent universe? Pictures of ships for sale? What am I missing?
-Tom
None
3376
I recall watching a teaser video showing off space combat as well as soldiers equipped with zero-gravity suits whilst floating and grappling about a space station.
I guess the new Modern Warfare compares in a fashion because it’s a big-budget cinematic experience with space ship combat (apparently off-rails) that transitions to on-foot FPS:
The big difference is that it’ll be shipping as a completed game in a month, and run really well. ;)
Timex
3378
I dunno man, that clip looks like pretty standard on rails COD single player gameplay.
Yeah, I have to say I’m not impressed. Remember the spaceship combat in that one Halo game?
Me neither.
Frankly, I was hoping you guys were going to tell me Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare lets you walk around in a hangar or something.
-Tom
But… but… you’re in a capital ship which acts as a mission selection hub, you visit planets, moons, and satellites, you upgrade your fighter as well as your equipment, and you can choose the order of the odd side-mission so they can add ‘non-linear game progression’ to the back of the box!
You can walk around the flight deck.
(Coincidentally, the largest ship in Star Citizen is called the Retribution)
Don’t know what it is about MW but I found that trailer just as boring as the real game(s) have been. :)
One funny thing I noticed in that video and in some movies that I’ve “always wondered about”. Is… how come people are always running everywhere at the start of ‘things’. It is as if they have had really poor planning and need to “run” to make up for all the lost time.
It would be even more boring if they were just casually sauntering around during an emergency situation!
I haven’t played a COD in many years, and will most likely not resume here. But who knows, given the hate on the internet it may actually be good. Let’s wait for the pollice verso from @BrianRubin - assuming this falls within his purview. :)
