Star Citizen Development Discussion (Is Derek Smart Right?)

Page 23 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
7,215
2,949
146
Some companies can decided to do what they want, but that doesn't change the basic industry definitions. I know much of what you speak of when it comes to games. Especially those that keep the "beta" tag on their product for years although it is a fully released product. Why they decide to call it beta makes no sense to me, but they do. I certainly don't call such products beta anymore.
Shrug, the word definitions are based on people's definitions, which can change over time. They aren't etched in granite, brought down from Mount Olympus. It's not restricted to the gaming industry, how long was gmail in beta?

My only issue with the title "Alpha" is how some people deal with criticisms. I've mentioned this a few times in this thread. Outside of that, I don't see any reason to care what they call it. I'm not sure why some people are getting hung up on the title of it, this game has so many issues with it why go after something so minor. To me it takes away from the valid points that this game has.

As for the evolving product.. well.. yeah. That's part of the issue, they kickstarted with something and then 'evolved' it into the mess it is now. While it may become a much better game (I say may because until it's out in it's completed form it's all vaper) it didn't start so massive. I probably wouldn't have too much of an issue if they were honest about what they could do and the timeframe for it. I don't agree with them expanding on the scope and features when it derails the progress of release. I'm told there was a vote on it, and everyone voted to delay the release to expand the scope but I don't konw when that was or who voted. I didn't see it after I put in for the kickstart.
Agreed on all points, and speaking as a backer. I sometimes do wish they would just 'make a f'ing space game already', but I'm sure the game will be good once it's finished, assuming it gets finished. At minimum they're going to have on hell of an engine to license after the fact, and the entire start -> finish will be studied a fair bit by some college undergrads for years to come.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
13,819
146
106
Shrug, the word definitions are based on people's definitions, which can change over time. They aren't etched in granite, brought down from Mount Olympus. It's not restricted to the gaming industry, how long was gmail in beta?
Yep, meanings change when the segment that uses it as a whole changes the meaning. Happens with words all the time for various reasons. But until then, it's the odd to use the wrong term. I'm not about to start calling cars "crabs," or phones "trees. " That would be pretty stupid and most people would make fun of me or not understand what I was saying at all. Which is part of the whole point of effective communication.
 

moonbogg

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2011
9,767
1,295
126
the game is already out. I have 400 hours in it already. ITs bigger then skyrim.
I thought it was just a tech demo where you get to walk around an airplane hangar or something. That's my impression at least.
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,025
336
136
It's been pointed out that this is missing other stuff that was done for the game, such as Star Marine's Alpha. While I still say this game is a train wreak and isn't anywhere near what I'd consider ready for prime time, I do agree that this isn't everything. The one take away from this that I do find really disturbing is the amount of ships sold vs what one can have. More so with the "redesigned" ones. You'd think that you'd finish what someone has shelled out $750+ real dollars for. To be fair though, I've read in a few places that some of hte ships can't be done as the size of them would cause the engine to crash.

edit: I do need to dig up the link of the ship sizes causing problems. I'll attempt to do so after I eat.
 

moonbogg

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2011
9,767
1,295
126
139 million dollars??? Holy mother of god. OK, I have it figured out now. Seriously, I know EXACTLY what is going on with these people. They promised a titanic, highly ambitious game and they convinced people to give them $139 MILLION dollars. That's what they actually did. Now, they are actually enjoying a very nice and comfortable life style, and in absolutely no rush at all to finish the game (that's a lot of actual work btw) because they are just too damn comfortable right now with all that money. Jesus I need to find something incredible to promise people and get that idea crowdfunded. DAYUM!!!!! $139 million effing dollars!!!! And all people have is a cheap space flight demo? Oh man they need to shut this thing down. This would be outright fraud if not for the likely crowdfunded laws that apply, since I'm sure in the fine print they didn't literally promise anything and the money was "donated" instead of something being purchased (oops?).
 

bbhaag

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2011
4,661
494
126
139 million dollars??? Holy mother of god. OK, I have it figured out now. Seriously, I know EXACTLY what is going on with these people. They promised a titanic, highly ambitious game and they convinced people to give them $139 MILLION dollars. That's what they actually did. Now, they are actually enjoying a very nice and comfortable life style, and in absolutely no rush at all to finish the game (that's a lot of actual work btw) because they are just too damn comfortable right now with all that money. Jesus I need to find something incredible to promise people and get that idea crowdfunded. DAYUM!!!!! $139 million effing dollars!!!! And all people have is a cheap space flight demo? Oh man they need to shut this thing down. This would be outright fraud if not for the likely crowdfunded laws that apply, since I'm sure in the fine print they didn't literally promise anything and the money was "donated" instead of something being purchased (oops?).
Is this an opinion piece you posted or do you have anything relevant too say about the development of the game? I'm really curious about this whole thread actually because it seems about 90% of it is pure opinion with little or no evidence or facts too substantiate the claims made in it. It seems that it would better suited to OT or P&N at this point.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,415
3,938
126
Is this an opinion piece you posted or do you have anything relevant too say about the development of the game? I'm really curious about this whole thread actually because it seems about 90% of it is pure opinion with little or no evidence or facts too substantiate the claims made in it. It seems that it would better suited to OT or P&N at this point.
all we know is the game is years late and with no end in sight. We also know lots of random little "events" happen and they will keep this thread going.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,876
460
126
Anyone who helps me achieve my goal of over $140 million is my friend!
lol +1

That, my brother, should be the one thing in this thread on which absolutely everyone can agree.

139 million dollars??? Holy mother of god. OK, I have it figured out now. Seriously, I know EXACTLY what is going on with these people. They promised a titanic, highly ambitious game and they convinced people to give them $139 MILLION dollars. That's what they actually did. Now, they are actually enjoying a very nice and comfortable life style, and in absolutely no rush at all to finish the game (that's a lot of actual work btw) because they are just too damn comfortable right now with all that money. Jesus I need to find something incredible to promise people and get that idea crowdfunded. DAYUM!!!!! $139 million effing dollars!!!! And all people have is a cheap space flight demo? Oh man they need to shut this thing down. This would be outright fraud if not for the likely crowdfunded laws that apply, since I'm sure in the fine print they didn't literally promise anything and the money was "donated" instead of something being purchased (oops?).
lol +1

No - they also have a cheap generic shooter. ;)

Roberts et al have also hired hundreds of people (who presumably aren't all masseuses, cooks and Brazilian hookers) so they aren't simply burning through the money. Apparently they have every intention of delivering two finished games, of which at least one is intended to be revolutionary as well as a throwback to Wing Commander. Whether they can deliver anything near that is an open question. But since Squadron 42 is now a separate game of very limited scope, there is the possibility of an ongoing revenue stream which might possibly be sufficient to finish coding something impressive. And if not, apparently a fair number (perhaps most) of the investors are happy with what they now have and looking forward to the final product.
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,516
73
91
all we know is the game is years late and with no end in sight.
As discussed numerous times before, that's a matter of perspective.

We know the game(s) (there's more than one) were originally intended to be released much earlier. We know CIG raised a LOT more money than expected and made the decision to greatly expand the scope of both games and thus increase the development timeline. That's a fact.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,760
60
91
Is this an opinion piece you posted or do you have anything relevant too say about the development of the game? I'm really curious about this whole thread actually because it seems about 90% of it is pure opinion with little or no evidence or facts too substantiate the claims made in it. It seems that it would better suited to OT or P&N at this point.
This is true of all the forums here. People throw out opinions on AMD incompetence and Intel laziness in CPUs, nvidia vs amd in video cards, iOS vs android in mobile devices, etc.

The only difference is, in this thread CIG apologists try to stifle the debate and get the thread locked. Dude, there is a "gameplay" (lol) only thread, already.

One of the most interesting things about star citizen is how it's fans act so aggressively towards dissent...
 
  • Like
Reactions: huskystafford

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
7,215
2,949
146
This is true of all the forums here. People throw out opinions on AMD incompetence and Intel laziness in CPUs, nvidia vs amd in video cards, iOS vs android in mobile devices, etc.

The only difference is, in this thread CIG apologists try to stifle the debate and get the thread locked. Dude, there is a "gameplay" (lol) only thread, already.

One of the most interesting things about star citizen is how it's fans act so aggressively towards dissent...
And likewise there's 1-3 people who have been trolling this and the other SC thread for *months*, sowing dissent for no real specific reason.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,415
3,938
126
This is true of all the forums here. People throw out opinions on AMD incompetence and Intel laziness in CPUs, nvidia vs amd in video cards, iOS vs android in mobile devices, etc.

The only difference is, in this thread CIG apologists try to stifle the debate and get the thread locked. Dude, there is a "gameplay" (lol) only thread, already.

One of the most interesting things about star citizen is how it's fans act so aggressively towards dissent...
It's the greatest example of sunk cost fallacy I've ever personally witnessed.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,760
60
91
And likewise there's 1-3 people who have been trolling this and the other SC thread for *months*, sowing dissent for no real specific reason.
The topic of this thread is whether or not Star Citizen is the absolute trainwreck that Derek Smart (and many others) alleges, so the more than 3 people saying "yes" are not trolls.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
7,215
2,949
146
The topic of this thread is whether or not Star Citizen is the absolute trainwreck that Derek Smart (and many others) alleges, so the more than 3 people saying "yes" are not trolls.
That's not what I'm referring to. One can form an opinion and post it in a constructive manner without redacted3-5x a page with inane babble, for weeks on end.


No profanity allowed in the technical forums.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,025
336
136
That's not what I'm referring to. One can form an opinion and post it in a constructive manner without redacted3-5x a page with inane babble, for weeks on end.
Soooo we should just post one post about our feelings on the topic and just move on? We shouldn't respond to other people's posts, even when we disagree with them? If that happened this forum would be even more of a ghost town... unless you're only saying this idea only applies to those threads you don't like.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
7,215
2,949
146
Soooo we should just post one post about our feelings on the topic and just move on? We shouldn't respond to other people's posts, even when we disagree with them? If that happened this forum would be even more of a ghost town... unless you're only saying this idea only applies to those threads you don't like.
No, not at all, the spirit of a forum is to have open communication between all members and voice differing opinions as we are clearly doing right now, there's nothing at all wrong with that. I'm talking about ridiculous photoshop garbage, jabs at other people's comments without actually returning anything constructive (or even making a point), and generally just trying to shut the conversation down by using the comment thread as a bludgeon instead of at least a soapbox.
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,025
336
136
No, not at all, the spirit of a forum is to have open communication between all members and voice differing opinions as we are clearly doing right now, there's nothing at all wrong with that. I'm talking about ridiculous photoshop garbage, jabs at other people's comments without actually returning anything constructive (or even making a point), and generally just trying to shut the conversation down by using the comment thread as a bludgeon instead of at least a soapbox.
Ah.. I understand now. I do agree with you for teh most part. I'm alright with some photoshop things, but I do agree that it can get out of control really quickly and add nothing to the convo at hand. I do think in one member's case (though I don't know for sure) there was a lot of heartburn from the game play thread. The fans of the game do tend to exhibit cult like behavior and attack people. I'm def not saying it's right, nor should one be allowed to do the same thing in reverse, which sadly does happen in this thread sometimes.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2015
7,215
2,949
146
Ah.. I understand now. I do agree with you for teh most part. I'm alright with some photoshop things, but I do agree that it can get out of control really quickly and add nothing to the convo at hand. I do think in one member's case (though I don't know for sure) there was a lot of heartburn from the game play thread. The fans of the game do tend to exhibit cult like behavior and attack people. I'm def not saying it's right, nor should one be allowed to do the same thing in reverse, which sadly does happen in this thread sometimes.
Agreed, criticism should be heralded as it provides feedback for improvement. Sometimes things get too far gone to rescue (which SC may be an example of) at which point for those that believe it's dead, it should be left alone. Any further beating of said dead horse only serves to troll others who are trying to keep it on life support.

This same kind of thing happens with Apple (who I happen to think is on its way out). I'd personally like to see SC succeed but I'm not blind to the utter silliness that has become its development cycle/publicity.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,760
60
91
Agreed, criticism should be heralded as it provides feedback for improvement. Sometimes things get too far gone to rescue (which SC may be an example of) at which point for those that believe it's dead, it should be left alone. Any further beating of said dead horse only serves to troll others who are trying to keep it on life support.

This same kind of thing happens with Apple (who I happen to think is on its way out). I'd personally like to see SC succeed but I'm not blind to the utter silliness that has become its development cycle/publicity.
Why should it be left alone? It's an interesting story and involves a common issue in game development (scope creep) and relatable concepts (boss who tells you to do really dumb things, so you waste tons of time on a project).
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,025
336
136
Sometimes euthanasia is the best solution.
As long as they have the money to continue, they really should. They owe it to the people that they've gotten money out of to do it. If for no other reason, they should continue because the longer this goes on, the more amusing it gets...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY