Support NeoGAF

[Evolution of Metal]

1. Larger ships will require multiple people to work at their full capacity.

2. Worrying about how X player has an unfair advantage is pointless when it's really going to be X player's group. And if you hate X player's group so much, then join another group to oppose them. There's enough money dumped in the game at this point that finding a well equipped organization isn't hard.

3. Also, I do have more ships than I can use, and I will be offering them to org mates to borrow when the permission systems are in place. This isn't theory, but fact. (So long as the project doesn't implode at least.) So there's going to be people out in the game with "unfair" advantages day one that haven't spent a dime more than a starter package.

4. As for you not spending your money because they're selling digital items, that's obviously your call. In an ideal world they wouldn't need to sell ships.

1/2. What happens when "us" only buys the cd key and none of us have a larger ship? The backers are going to have a huge head start to do major missions. Non-backers are going to have a freemium game on their hands. Your solution to join a clan that potentially has larger ships is not the optimal one.

3. Paragraph says that because you spent $, now all your squad is going to have an advantage. You literally say that because your friends can access your ships, they will have "unfair" advantage.

4. Paragraph sums up that in the end, SC needs money and therefore they are selling in-game items.

It is fine to say that backers are going to get an advantaged initially, but you cannot sugar coat it to: ships have counters, skill over stats, join a clan with large ships etc. In the end, SC needs to convince me that by paying 60$ I am not going to be locked out of the content, nor that I will have to play for weeks to unlock a ship. MMO games like Guild Wars or WoW never sell legendary items/armor which makes it fair for everyone to grind those dungeons to get it. SC kind of sells everything which makes it unfair for people that don't have money in the bank. And I understand why SC sells items, but that doesn't make it fair to non-backers.

 

[Aselith]

1/2. What happens when "us" only buys the cd key and none of us have a larger ship? The backers are going to have a huge head start to do major missions. Non-backers are going to have a freemium game on their hands. Your solution to join a clan that potentially has larger ships is not the optimal one.

You can't get a "cd-key" without a ship and there's no indication that you can't beat single player with just the ship you start with. Capitol ships are more than likely going to be mostly used in player vs player which if you think you're going to lone wolf PvP when capitol ships start coming out well...good luck.

If you want to be heavy into PvP, you'll join a group. If you want solo, you'll be soloing small targets or working your way up to a capitol ship.

Buying a ship gives some advantage but not the one you seem to think.

You and your buddies can gang up and go try to hunt solo capitol ships and that should be entirely possible for you going by previous space sims and you can of course participate in the big engagements as the capitol ships will still need fighter support.

 

[Zalusithix]

1/2. What happens when "us" only buys the cd key and none of us have a larger ship? The backers are going to have a huge head start to do major missions. Non-backers are going to have a freemium game on their hands. Your solution to join a clan that potentially has larger ships is not the optimal one.

3. Paragraph says that because you spent $, now all your squad is going to have an advantage. You literally say that because your friends can access your ships, they will have "unfair" advantage.

4. Paragraph sums up that in the end, SC needs money and therefore they are selling in-game items.

It is fine to say that backers are going to get an advantaged initially, but you cannot sugar coat it to: ships have counters, skill over stats, join a clan with large ships etc. In the end, SC needs to convince me that by paying 60$ I am not going to be locked out of the content, nor that I will have to play for weeks to unlock a ship. MMO games like Guild Wars or WoW never sell legendary items/armor which makes it fair for everyone to grind those dungeons to get it. SC kind of sells everything which makes it unfair for people that don't have money in the bank. And I understand why SC sells items, but that doesn't make it fair to non-backers.

1/2) The same thing that happens when people join a MMO type game that's been out for awhile. They'll be forced into a situation where other people are ahead of them in some way. At least in SC an individual has the option to immediately be part of the bigger picture without grinding their way up there. If they choose to not join with anybody else due to pride or any other reason, then that's on them.

A level starting line means jack all when you're not dealing with a competitive ladder competition. Even if you had one to start with, it'll quickly unbalance itself based on population numbers, play time, and starting dates. It's a shortsighted view to only concern yourself with what is "fair" from the start of something that'll never reset. This is a persistent universe, not a competition to some arbitrary end "win" state. Things have to be conceptually balanced for a game that is to last many years with new players joining at any point in its lifespan. The fact that the start of SC's PU will closely resemble its mature state will actually facilitate easier balancing as they wont have to wait for months to see what problems show up. If you want an "unfair" situation, then just wait until some organization or coalition of them manages to get a hold of a Bengal carrier. They'll be able to do stuff that nobody else will. Likewise they'll also face threats that nobody else will as the ship will be persistent and require 24/7 manning.

3) I put "unfair" in quotations because I don't believe it is truly unfair. An advantage, sure, but nothing that'll detract from somebody else's game. At least it wont detract any more than it would in a universe without the ship sales.

As for being locked out, you're not. Everything sold will be available in universe. Timing wise, you should expect the largest ships to take time to earn. It would be pointless if they were super easy to get and outfit as they're not meant for one person to begin with. Which leads into the WoW/GW comparison. Those traditional MMO type games are about getting gear for yourself to increase your relative power vs other players and the environment. The big ships in SC only increase your relative potential. Without other people to share that potential with, your actual power isn't really boosted much, and might actually go down. SC is fundamentally different in that sense compared to MMOs that most people are familiar with.

 

[Aselith]

a Bengal carrier.

Oh man I didn't know they were going to have ships that big! Hnnnngggghh

 

[Zalusithix]

You can't get a "cd-key" without a ship and there's no indication that you can't beat single player with just the ship you start with. Capitol ships are more than likely going to be mostly used in player vs player which if you think you're going to lone wolf PvP when capitol ships start coming out well...good luck.

If you want to be heavy into PvP, you'll join a group. If you want solo, you'll be soloing small targets or working your way up to a capitol ship.

The big ships will be used in PvE more than PvP. There's supposed to be something like a 10:1 ratio of NPC to player characters, and humanity is at war with an alien species hell bent on destroying us. The biggest routine challenges are likely going to be against them, not other organizations. Especially considering the Vanduul will have ships equal to the UEE military in capability, which far exceed the power of any player owned ship.

As for soloing up to a cap ship, that's possible, but foolish. You might as well go hand it over to the pirates instead of losing your life while attempting to defend it. AI will not be able to cope with managed groups of players, and you can bet your ass there will be coordinated groups of players looking for juicy targets.

Oh man I didn't know they were going to have ships that big! Hnnnngggghh

The Bengal will be the largest players can control, but there are much larger ships. Which feeds back into the whole using cap ships in PvE more often. You'll need coalitions of capable organizations to take on something like a Kingship.

 

[staticneuron]

1/2. What happens when "us" only buys the cd key and none of us have a larger ship? The backers are going to have a huge head start to do major missions. Non-backers are going to have a freemium game on their hands. Your solution to join a clan that potentially has larger ships is not the optimal one.

3. Paragraph says that because you spent $, now all your squad is going to have an advantage. You literally say that because your friends can access your ships, they will have "unfair" advantage.

4. Paragraph sums up that in the end, SC needs money and therefore they are selling in-game items.

It is fine to say that backers are going to get an advantaged initially, but you cannot sugar coat it to: ships have counters, skill over stats, join a clan with large ships etc. In the end, SC needs to convince me that by paying 60$ I am not going to be locked out of the content, nor that I will have to play for weeks to unlock a ship. MMO games like Guild Wars or WoW never sell legendary items/armor which makes it fair for everyone to grind those dungeons to get it. SC kind of sells everything which makes it unfair for people that don't have money in the bank. And I understand why SC sells items, but that doesn't make it fair to non-backers.

1. The mission content designed for a multicrew ship or a capital ship would be nothing like something you would accomplish alone. The way the game is designed it doesn't mean that there needs to be a progression. If you are a solo player and prefer to travel alone or in a very small crew (or if you prefer large crew/capital ships) then you won't ever see some content and it shouldn't bother you because it is not how you chose to play.

2. That is not what he said. A ship that needs a staff is just that. A ship that needs a staff. There is no "advantage" versus someone who is able to man their ship alone or with a small crew. In addition to that I don't think there is anything right now that implies that in the universe you will specifically be forced to go against another org. What I interpret from Zalusithix, is that if you are really concerned with what a particular org has, you could join up with an opposing org.... and make it your mission to mess thier day up. Of course that is all personal and the flexibility of design allows you to do that.

3. Your choice words is unfair. Please explain to us here what exactly is fair and unfair for this game type. It really seems like you are throwing out these terms without understanding that the ships are role based and can be skewed by equipment and mods. The ship designs have a RPS design on them so I am trying to figure out exactly what you mean by "unfair".
From the sales

Disclaimer

Remember: we are offering this pledge ship to help fund Star Citizen’s development. All decorative ‘flare’ items will also be available to acquire in the finished game world. The goal is to make additional ships available that give players a different experience rather than a particular advantage when the persistent universe launches.

4. The CCU ends during the beta and the ability to purchase ships end, when game is fully released. Non backers have access to get to the same ships and material, it may take time and exploration. This doesn't block them from anything and may make the verse seem more alive because many role specific jobs will have actual players to fill role. And for backers who actually spent money to help make the game in the first place, it is pretty interesting that you feel that the backers who took a leap of faith decide to hop in on specific role based ships some sort of negative issue.

 

[Burny]

In the end, SC needs to convince me that by paying 60$ I am not going to be locked out of the content, nor that I will have to play for weeks to unlock a ship. MMO games like Guild Wars or WoW never sell legendary items/armor which makes it fair for everyone to grind those dungeons to get it. SC kind of sells everything which makes it unfair for people that don't have money in the bank. And I understand why SC sells items, but that doesn't make it fair to non-backers.

As for having to play weeks... You should have a look at E. There you have to play weeks if not more to obtain some ships. It's a very grindy game in that sense. But the biggest ship is not necessarily the best and can be destroyed or forced to flee by a couple smaller ships if their players know what they're doing.

I'm worried more for backers finding that their ships' capabilities do not live up to the fantasy literature (concept sales) that sold them on it. Which is very well possible, because the sheer number of varying ships and features in Star Citizen could turn the game into a balancing hell.

As for backers having ships available from the start: if people are crazy enough to spend hundreds, sometimes thousands of dollars on a ship pledge, not everyone should be flying that ship within two weeks. And not everyone should have to, because the game should offer other content than player PvP.

 

[KKRT00]

It is fine to say that backers are going to get an advantaged initially, but you cannot sugar coat it to: ships have counters, skill over stats, join a clan with large ships etc. In the end, SC needs to convince me that by paying 60$ I am not going to be locked out of the content, nor that I will have to play for weeks to unlock a ship. MMO games like Guild Wars or WoW never sell legendary items/armor which makes it fair for everyone to grind those dungeons to get it. SC kind of sells everything which makes it unfair for people that don't have money in the bank. And I understand why SC sells items, but that doesn't make it fair to non-backers.

The problem is that You are comparing this game to theme park MMOs, not sandbox MMOs like EVE. If You played EVE, You would understand that You are not in disadvantage.
You dont have to grind in sandbox MMOs, You can get rich in seconds with a good idea.

 

[DarkFlame]

How so? PC gaming was in great shape before Star Citizen. It would still be in great shape if the entire project vanished from earth (or, perhaps more fittingly, our universe) tomorrow.

If this game doesn't deliver,all the talk about making a PC exclusive that shows the true PC gaming power and what tripple A exclusives on PC would have been if they actually existed(because all tripple A now adays are multi-platform and mostly console ports),will be mocked.

And they'll be right.If this game succeeds on the other hand both financially and critically,it might show the way for other developers to have the PC as a main developing platform

 

[Alienous]

Just, like, maybe try to get half a clue before just spouting such BS?

CryEngine isn't fucking magic, it just has the ability to host it. The graphical fidelity showcased by this game is based on a hell of a lot of hard work by hundreds of talented developers.

God. It's like moths to a flame with any and every Star Citizen thread.

Sorry, you're right. My post was worded in a unnecessarily confrontational manner.

I don't mean to discredit the hard work put into the game. It's just that, at least personally, I haven't seen much from it that has impressed me outside of what I know CryEngine is inherently capable of; things like the lighting effects and atmospherics that are part of that engine. Everything else, from the animations to the models, haven't and don't to me scream 'this game is doing impressive stuff', quite the opposite actually.

But I can understand that it might just not be for me.

 

[T.E.D]

Why would people be down on this because it's a PC exclusive?

What's all that about?

 

[paragonpro]

One things for sure. Im going to build my first gaming pc for this game.

 

[8-Bit Sunset]

Why would people be down on this because it's a PC exclusive?

What's all that about?

Jealousy!

 

[T.E.D]

Jealousy!

Surely not? So PC is not allowed to have exclusives?

 

[8-Bit Sunset]

Surely not? So PC is not allowed to have exclusives?

It seems that way doesn't it.
PC users want, say for example a port of "Bloodbourne" PS4 users laugh and say "don't go begging for ports" etc... "Buy a PS4" la,la,la
But if you turn the tables it seems as though they don't like it as much!
I can't think of any other reason to sour on this beauty!

Hey I could be wrong but it seems like a case of sour grapes!

 

[Sky Saw]

It seems that way doesn't it.
PC users want, say for example a port of "Bloodbourne" PS4 users laugh and say "don't go begging for ports" etc... "Buy a PS4" la,la,la
But if you turn the tables it seems as though they don't like it as much!
I can't think of any other reason to sour on this beauty!

Hey I could be wrong but it seems like a case of sour grapes!

Well the majority of the site are PS4 gamers, it's inevitable.

 

[GRaider81]

Have it downloading, seriously can't wait to play.

I'm going to wait and see how much I like it but I'm considering getting a stick. I'm not going to go crazy initially though. I've read this is "OK" for a cheap stick. Anyone have any experience or recommendations in the £40-£60 range?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B001CXYMFS/

 

[Tic174]

Have it downloading, seriously can't wait to play.

I'm going to wait and see how much I like it but I'm considering getting a stick. I'm not going to go crazy initially though. I've read this is "OK" for a cheap stick. Anyone have any experience or recommendations in the £40-£60 range?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B001CXYMFS/

I have that stick, I like it alot for elite, but haven't really tried star citizen with it yet as im too lazy to figure out which buttons i should bind for what.

 

[Burny]

Have it downloading, seriously can't wait to play.

I'm going to wait and see how much I like it but I'm considering getting a stick. I'm not going to go crazy initially though. I've read this is "OK" for a cheap stick. Anyone have any experience or recommendations in the £40-£60 range?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B001CXYMFS/

I can only speak from ED experience, but in that range, that's about the only HOTAS you should get. There's an ED youtuber (Isinona) who uses that stick and is among the best pretend space pilots you'll find. If you're going to spend more, I would recommend looking at the CH Products stuff and ignore the Saitek products in between. But that's an order of magnitude more expensive - even without having to buy pedals due to the lack of a twist axis. The mini stick on the CH Products Pro Throttle is invaluable however. Which is why I would recommend to avoid the Thrustmaster Warthog for such space games unless it has an equivalent, which I wouldn't know about. The amount of available buttons, HAT switches and axis is also a dream. On top of that, the hardware is sturdy as hell, if pretty ugly and not really fit for small hands.

How useful a stick will be in SC eventually remains to be seen. It should be playable pretty well with mouse+keyboard.

 

[Zalusithix]

Which is why I would recommend to avoid the Thrustmaster Warthog for such space games unless it has an equivalent, which I wouldn't know about.

The Warthog has an analog pointer nub that's controlled by the middle finger. It's what I used in Elite to have analog strafe controls. Unfortunately the range of movement is very small and is quite finicky. It's better than a pure digital hat control, but only just. A true analog stick will be better. A true multi axis throttle being the ideal, but non-existent in the commercial realm.

Overall the Warthog throttle is really great for traditional air combat, but lacking on the space end. You're better off getting the stick by itself if you're in love with the Warthog, and then another throttle for space games.

 

[endlessflood]

If this game succeeds on the other hand both financially and critically,it might show the way for other developers to have the PC as a main developing platform

They convinced random people on the internet to give them $100,000,000.00. I'm pretty sure it's already succeeded financially in the most spectacular way possible

 

[staticneuron]

Surely not? So PC is not allowed to have exclusives?

LMAO. It isn't the fact of whether or not a particular platform has exclusive normally the discussion is centered around quality of exclusives and genres. Even if it was console exclusive certainly have the number advantage (especially if you count them all ignoring quality). It really seems like you are reaching when the list (even though moving fast you can see these) include every single entry of a franchise. The sims? Age of empire? Tropico? Did I see Jazz the Jackrabbit?!?

While I play both consoles and PC titles on a regular basis, there really is no need to be upset over the fact that the amount of exclusives on console outnumber the exclusives on pc. Not really a technical reason for most titles, just logistics and money. But time is slowly ending where there are exclusive for either platform and when they do appear it is certainly a choice not to port.

 

[Thorn]

LMAO. It isn't the fact of whether or not a particular platform has exclusive normally the discussion is centered around quality of exclusives and genres. Even if it was console exclusive certainly have the number advantage (especially if you count them all ignoring quality). It really seems like you are reaching when the list (even though moving fast you can see these) include every single entry of a franchise. The sims? Age of empire? Tropico? Did I see Jazz the Jackrabbit?!?

While I play both consoles and PC titles on a regular basis, there really is no need to be upset over the fact that the amount of exclusives on console outnumber the exclusives on pc. Not really a technical reason for most titles, just logistics and money. But time is slowly ending where there are exclusive for either platform and when they do appear it is certainly a choice not to port.

Prefer not to get into system wars, but this is completely wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PC_exclusive_games

 

[Denton]

LMAO. It isn't the fact of whether or not a particular platform has exclusive normally the discussion is centered around quality of exclusives and genres. Even if it was console exclusive certainly have the number advantage (especially if you count them all ignoring quality). It really seems like you are reaching when the list (even though moving fast you can see these) include every single entry of a franchise. The sims? Age of empire? Tropico? Did I see Jazz the Jackrabbit?!?

While I play both consoles and PC titles on a regular basis, there really is no need to be upset over the fact that the amount of exclusives on console outnumber the exclusives on pc. Not really a technical reason for most titles, just logistics and money. But time is slowly ending where there are exclusive for either platform and when they do appear it is certainly a choice not to port.

LMAO indeed.

 

[Mudcrab]

Why would people be down on this because it's a PC exclusive?

What's all that about?

Because they can get away with it.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

LMAO. It isn't the fact of whether or not a particular platform has exclusive normally the discussion is centered around quality of exclusives and genres. Even if it was console exclusive certainly have the number advantage (especially if you count them all ignoring quality). It really seems like you are reaching when the list (even though moving fast you can see these) include every single entry of a franchise. The sims? Age of empire? Tropico? Did I see Jazz the Jackrabbit?!?

While I play both consoles and PC titles on a regular basis, there really is no need to be upset over the fact that the amount of exclusives on console outnumber the exclusives on pc. Not really a technical reason for most titles, just logistics and money. But time is slowly ending where there are exclusive for either platform and when they do appear it is certainly a choice not to port.

Lol, more pc exclusive games are released on Steam in a month then there are consoles exclusives released in year.

 

[staticneuron]

Prefer not to get into system wars, but this is completely wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PC_exclusive_games

That is a large list including games all the way back from 1985 and including titles that were eventually ported. My question to you. Is have you ever compiled a list using the same metrics there for every console since 1985. You might be surprised.

Even when stopping at the 7th generation (because most titles seem to have gone MP since then) we are talking about 13,000 titles. I wouldn't doubt alot of them eventually are emulated, some eventually ported. Vast majority of those simply never were ported because either the pubs did not find it financially feasible to port or it was to much of an arduous task to port. Now I am not that much of a patient guy to try to go through all 13,000 titles to weed out how many exactly were ports but it is a pretty strong assumption that most of those titles 7th generation and before were exclusive to their respective console at time of release.

LMAO indeed.

So....enlightening.

Lol, more pc exclusive games are released on Steam in a month then there are consoles exclusives released in year.

If you are talking about greenlight and other self distributed games then I will agree. But as pointed above counting the amount of software release up to 7th gen that is about 13,000 titles for consoles. Iirc last year around September steam had about 3700 titles available and added 1600 since then. While eventually there will be a time when official exclusive releases will outnumber consoles (especially thanks to most products being MP for the past generation) people seem to forget how strongly the marked favored consoles for a few generations.

I don't want to detract from the fans of PC games (I am one) nor the success of Star Citizen (which I am a backer) but when things are brought up like this I am curious of how many that are scoffing actually took the time to look up numbers.

 

[TheChocolateWar]

If you are talking about greenlight and other self distributed games then I will agree. But as pointed above counting the amount of software release up to 7th gen that is about 13,000 titles for consoles. Iirc last year around September steam had about 3700 titles available and added 1600 since then. While eventually there will be a time when official exclusive releases will outnumber consoles (especially thanks to most products being MP for the past generation) people seem to forget how strongly the marked favored consoles for a few generations.
.

A) Source for 13,000?
B) So now it is fair to say "all console platforms combined" v. "pc"? Stating for a second I don't agree that the PC has fewer exclusives than all consoles combined, I think this is an unfair metric to begin with.

 

[staticneuron]

A) Source for 13,000?
B) So now it is fair to say "all console platforms combined" v. "pc"? Stating for a second I don't agree that the PC has fewer exclusives than all consoles combined, I think this is an unfair metric to begin with.

nes - 713
sms - 318
snes - 738
genesis - 900
jag -82
n64 - 338
saturn - 600
playstation - 2355
playstation 2 - 3814
dreamcast - 636
gc - 700
xbx - 969
3d0 - 312
pcfx - 62
32x - 40
tg16 - 139
Neo geo -100
Atari - 100

This is information you can look up yourself about libraries released for those consoles. being nice because I didn't include every home console ever released, I ignored handhelds (seriously that number would grow alot), didn't put numbers for 8th generation and current generation.

Why would that be an unfair metric? Consoles are fixed by time. PC's aren't. The list of exclusives above that was posted by user list titles as far back as 1985. So it would seem fair to include consoles released since then as well.

 

[The_Super_Inframan]

A (probably not complete) List of PC Exclusive games from 1977 till 2013

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Oak-3zZAQdud79EA_x_Ewp9elUFdPb8RSFbsY-uw5sM/edit

4457...
And not all PC games ever made are on Steam, not really useful to use the Steam catalog as a metric for all of PC gaming

and list wars are kinda dumb anyways imo...

 

[Dictator93]

And not all PC games ever made are on Steam, not really useful to use the Steam catalog as a metric for all of PC gaming

and list wars are kinda dumb anyways imo...

But list wars have everything to do with Star Citizen having raised $100 million!

 

[-tetsuo-]

What is happening in here

 

[AP90]

What is happening in here

Someone quantum jumped back to the list wars!

 

[tuxfool]

What is happening in here

List wars are happening.

 

[staticneuron]

But list wars have everything to do with Star Citizen having raised $100 million!

Especially when those list are comprised of ship specs!

 

[TheChocolateWar]

This is information you can look up yourself about libraries released for those consoles. being nice because I didn't include every home console ever released, I ignored handhelds (seriously that number would grow alot), didn't put numbers for 8th generation and current generation.

Why would that be an unfair metric? Consoles are fixed by time. PC's aren't. The list of exclusives above that was posted by user list titles as far back as 1985. So it would seem fair to include consoles released since then as well.

Please cite your sources;

It is unfair because you're combining multiple gaming platforms across multiple companies who are wholly distinct in their operating structure. Not only that, but "consoles" are typically compared against each other, and yet seem to only band together in false unity to compare themselves to PCs. As a gaming platform, the PC far surpasses the number of exclusives any other individual gaming platform has. You're using an arbitrary distinction when you separate "all other gaming platforms" and call them "consoles" for the sake of creating a cross section that only exists in gaming vernacular.


If anything, the term "console" is a vacuous fabrication of fanboys. If you look at the actual definition of "gaming console" in the Oxford English Dictionary and a cross section of other dictionaries, the term "game console" is far more broad than you are allowing. If anything, a gaming PC is itself a gaming "console" under accepted English etymology.

 

[Raticus79]

But list wars have everything to do with Star Citizen having raised $100 million!

It's important to settle the issue of how the Jazz Jackrabbit era of shareware stacks up against the Jaguar's library.

I guess it depends on whether the shareware is registered or not. Hmmm

 

[staticneuron]

Please cite your sources;

It is unfair because you're combining multiple gaming platforms across multiple companies who are wholly distinct in their operating structure. Not only that, but "consoles" are typically compared against each other, and yet seem to only band together in false unity to compare themselves to PCs. As a gaming platform, the PC far surpasses the number of exclusives any other individual gaming platform has. You're using an arbitrary distinction when you separate "all other gaming platforms" and call them "consoles" for the sake of creating a cross section that only exists in gaming vernacular.


If anything, the term "console" is a vacuous fabrication of fanboys. If you look at the actual definition of "gaming console" in the Oxford English Dictionary and a cross section of other dictionaries, the term "game console" is far more broad than you are allowing. If anything, a gaming PC is itself a gaming "console" under accepted English etymology.

Ok sure. You win. Sorry for contesting this. This is off topic. That is all I have to say on the matter.

 

[epmode]

Oh god stopppp

edit: I apparently hadn't refreshed this tab since yesterday, didn't see the last few posts

 

[Grief.exe]

LMAO. It isn't the fact of whether or not a particular platform has exclusive normally the discussion is centered around quality of exclusives and genres. Even if it was console exclusive certainly have the number advantage (especially if you count them all ignoring quality). It really seems like you are reaching when the list (even though moving fast you can see these) include every single entry of a franchise. The sims? Age of empire? Tropico? Did I see Jazz the Jackrabbit?!?

While I play both consoles and PC titles on a regular basis, there really is no need to be upset over the fact that the amount of exclusives on console outnumber the exclusives on pc. Not really a technical reason for most titles, just logistics and money. But time is slowly ending where there are exclusive for either platform and when they do appear it is certainly a choice not to port.

 

[joseph]

Because they can get away with it.

..because they need to go through it, like we all did and if not here then where?

 

[aliengmr]

It is fine to say that backers are going to get an advantaged initially, but you cannot sugar coat it to: ships have counters, skill over stats, join a clan with large ships etc. In the end, SC needs to convince me that by paying 60$ I am not going to be locked out of the content, nor that I will have to play for weeks to unlock a ship. MMO games like Guild Wars or WoW never sell legendary items/armor which makes it fair for everyone to grind those dungeons to get it. SC kind of sells everything which makes it unfair for people that don't have money in the bank. And I understand why SC sells items, but that doesn't make it fair to non-backers.

As far as I'm aware buying ships with real money ends when the game launches. They also made it clear that you would not be locked out of content. There will probably be a cash shop similar to Elite's.

As for how long it will take to get ships in game, I don't know, but I think it will be along the same lines as Elite, which is long or short depending on you, but not overly grindy.

I doesn't sound like it will go the way of Star Trek Online, which to me is on the bleeding edge of acceptable in terms of MTs (and often crosses that line IMO).

As for backer advantage, well, a more expensive ship is not necessarily going to be better, just have a different purpose. Insurance, to me, seems one of the bigger advantages, as well as prior experience playing the game.

 

[viveks86]

Man, reading the last page is giving me a headache

Bye

 

[Nokterian]

Man, reading the last page is giving me a headache

Bye

I have a migraine now good god.

 

[Durante]

While I play both consoles and PC titles on a regular basis, there really is no need to be upset over the fact that the amount of exclusives on console outnumber the exclusives on pc.

What about this?

(This is from an official Metacritic article. You can talk about the validity of Metacritic all you want, but it's the closest thing we have to a remotely "objective" metric, and it certainly doesn't favour the types of smaller games abundant on PC)

 

[Sky Saw]

What about this?

http://abload.de/img/2014exclusiveshquqb.png

(This is from an official Metacritic article. You can talk about the validity of Metacritic all you want, but it's the closest thing we have to a remotely "objective" metric, and it certainly [I]doesn't[/I] favour the types of smaller games abundant on PC)[/QUOTE]

"Indies don't count..Also those other games I've never heard of"

 

[SparkTR]

What about this?

(This is from an official Metacritic article. You can talk about the validity of Metacritic all you want, but it's the closest thing we have to a remotely "objective" metric, and it certainly doesn't favour the types of smaller games abundant on PC)

Seriously, it's been that way for years now. An open platform always attracts more software due to its lower barrier for entry and how easy it is to foster an audience compared to a closed one.