• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Star Citizen: Chris Robert`s new space sim (the Wing Commander guy)

Page 99 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
preslove said:
You really should read this: http://www.reaxxion.com/10195/why-st...plete-disaster
Click to expand...

Haha, was just scanning the thread when I ran across this. I agree with your stance that this game is going to be a disaster, and have thought that from day one. But to quote something written by Derek.. I can't tell if you're being satirical, or just don't know who he is and really think he might have some credibility.
 
Markbnj said:
Haha, was just scanning the thread when I ran across this. I agree with your stance that this game is going to be a disaster, and have thought that from day one. But to quote something written by Derek.. I can't tell if you're being satirical, or just don't know who he is and really think he might have some credibility.
Click to expand...

I think he has credibility when he talks about the financing involved, as well as the difficulties involved in what CR is doing. People in this thread act like $85 million is enough to develop anything, when it is actually a relatively small figure compared to big AAA games. And those big, >$200 million games are simpler and easier to develop than what is being promised.
 
preslove said:
I think he has credibility when he talks about the financing involved, as well as the difficulties involved in what CR is doing. People in this thread act like $85 million is enough to develop anything, when it is actually a relatively small figure compared to big AAA games. And those big, >$200 million games are simpler and easier to develop than what is being promised.
Click to expand...


Look at gta v. That was like 200 mill right? And it has about 1/10 the content croberts is promising.
 
preslove said:
People in this thread act like $85 million is enough to develop anything, when it is actually a relatively small figure compared to big AAA games. And those big, >$200 million games are simpler and easier to develop than what is being promised.
Click to expand...

What is the typical AAA title's development budget? I'm not talking total budget. Development budget. Yeah I know the big guys say it cost $200 million to make an Assassin's Creed (or whatever) title. But a huge chunk of that is the marketing budget.
 
rivethead said:
And some of those FPS missions will be in a zero-g environment so the animations and physics are much different than in an environment with gravity.

To me, that's where CIG went off course. Build a basic FPS module. In gravity. Enhance the "usual" FPS game mechanics. A few guns. One or two glorious/beautiful map. And that's your start and test bed.

But no, they had to throw in zero-g and this crazy looking sata ball game.......just seemed way too ambitious to start with. Those should have been worked on/added later.
Click to expand...

To be honest, the only things that are extra for zero-g is the animations. The physics is mostly already in the engine (only need to add Newton's 3rd law making the weapons a "thruster" which was already coded for the ship physics, and apply the same force vector to a "person" in zero-g is no different than applying the same force to a "ship" in zero-g). So the only added cost/complexity factor is the zero-g animations and the push/pull mechanics (which again, is nothing more than applying a force vector to the object).
 
Last edited:
Fallen Kell said:
To be honest, the only things that are extra for zero-g is the animations. The physics is mostly already in the engine (only need to add Newton's 3rd law making the weapons a "thruster" which was already coded for the ship physics, and apply the same force vector to a "person" in zero-g is no different than applying the same force to a "ship" in zero-g). So the only added cost/complexity factor is the zero-g animations and the push/pull mechanics (which again, is nothing more than applying a force vector to the object).
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But it's still extra work. And to hear Ilfonic and Travis Day talk about all the zero G/Sata ball work, it's not unreasonable to believe it was a "lot" of extra work!

I think CIG erred too much on the side of "let's blow them away" when a basic FPS module more readily available for testing would have appeased a lot of backers.
 
rivethead said:
Fair enough. But it's still extra work. And to hear Ilfonic and Travis Day talk about all the zero G/Sata ball work, it's not unreasonable to believe it was a "lot" of extra work!

I think CIG erred too much on the side of "let's blow them away" when a basic FPS module more readily available for testing would have appeased a lot of backers.
Click to expand...

This!
The zero G actually turned me off to the idea. Just stick with a basic shooter add zero G and shield and such later on.
 
I won't argue that G/Sata Ball isn't a lot of work (I highly suspect it was since they have to design the game/rules, code all the game rules, create the level design/playing field, all the art assets, any/all special effects, add a scoring system, create a leaderboard/ranking/statistics system). All of that takes a decent amount of work, but the foundation of simply adding FPS to the scope of the game and even zero-g combat isn't much more than reusing the zero-g ship combat, the only difference is that the "ship" is you and your "thrusters" are your weapons and/or any rocket packs/push/pull mechanics, and that is my point, in that it really isn't a lot of extra work at the fundamental level, especially if they applied proper object oriented design where-in everything would already inherit most of the previous work done for ships. The only slight addition that might make things a little more complex is the changing center of gravity for a person's model when moving/grabbing/carrying an object/etc., but again, that is a very simple calculation.
 
rivethead said:
Fair enough. But it's still extra work. And to hear Ilfonic and Travis Day talk about all the zero G/Sata ball work, it's not unreasonable to believe it was a "lot" of extra work!

I think CIG erred too much on the side of "let's blow them away" when a basic FPS module more readily available for testing would have appeased a lot of backers.
Click to expand...

It was, however setting up the zero-G and anims isn't just a one off for FPS combat, it also pertains to EVA, salvaging situations, exploration, etc.
 
JSt0rm said:
If you being offended about me talking negatively about a video game has your panties in a bunch then this entire exchange is and has always been all about you.
Click to expand...
The game can flop or not, I don't really care. Just find it interesting and hilarious the time and devotion you have to it failing.
 
rivethead said:
What is the typical AAA title's development budget? I'm not talking total budget. Development budget. Yeah I know the big guys say it cost $200 million to make an Assassin's Creed (or whatever) title. But a huge chunk of that is the marketing budget.
Click to expand...

GTA 5 was $137 million. Destiny cost $140 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop

Thing is, it would be a mistake to say that Cloud Imperium isn't spending any money marketing it. They have a marketing department, as well as other ancillary departments, like Human Resources. They were at E3, which isn't cheap. They may not spend $128 million, but they're going to end up spending a lot on marketing, in the end.
 
Don't forget once you've proven you have a business idea people will spend money on getting additional investors isn't that difficult.
Chris soul lose some control but the option is still there.
I believe most budgets are 1/3 development and 2/3 marketing
 
preslove said:
it would be a mistake to say that Cloud Imperium isn't spending any money marketing it. They have a marketing department, as well as other ancillary departments, like Human Resources. They were at E3, which isn't cheap. They may not spend $128 million, but they're going to end up spending a lot on marketing, in the end.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. But very little of the $85 million has been spent on marketing. It's almost all development. I still haven't seen a tv commercial for SC. I've never seen an SC add in a gaming magazine. And last time I was in GameStop there wasn't a single SC poster in sight.

So when we're talking about how much it takes to build a game, I want to make sure we're talking development only, not the whole budget.

So if the point is, it cost GTA V $127 to develop and it does less than what SC is scoped for, then yes it's a concern that SC can be built (as stated to backers) for only $85 million.

I think SC will start marketing when they actually have something to sell (pre-orders for SQ42 late 1Q16 is my guess).
 
Last edited:
rivethead said:
I don't disagree. But very little of the $85 million has been spent on marketing. It's almost all development. I still haven't seen a tv commercial for SC. I've never seen an SC add in a gaming magazine. And last time I was in GameStop there wasn't a single SC poster in site.

So when we're talking about how much it takes to build a game, I want to make sure we're talking development only, not the whole budget.

So if the point is, it cost GTA V $127 to develop and it does less than what SC is scoped for, then yes it's a concern that SC can be built (as stated to backers) for only $85 million.

I think SC will start marketing when they actually have something to sell (pre-orders for SQ42 late 1Q16 is my guess).
Click to expand...
The shows and updates are all marketing budget. The ship sales and the creation of those assets over finishing the game is all marketing. I have ONLY seen marketing so far.
 
JSt0rm said:
The shows and updates are all marketing budget. The ship sales and the creation of those assets over finishing the game is all marketing. I have ONLY seen marketing so far.
Click to expand...

If you're referring to the weekly shows CIG puts on those are funded through backer subscriptions....not counted in the $85 million.

Ship creation is definitely not marketing in my book. Those are art assets.

If you've only seen marketing so far, then you haven't loaded the AC module and played any of the modes/maps. Nothing marketing about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top