Dictator93
Member
Lets be honest, beyond accuarcy, exactness, or realism, these all kind of miss the point.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Citizen Pre-Alpha: 'Arena Commander' Dogfighting
- Thread starter MrBig
- Start date
- Status
Lets be honest, beyond accuarcy, exactness, or realism, these all kind of miss the point.
You almost make it sound like anything besides that matters.
If you really want, you can customize the texture streamer to store as many textures really as it possibly can to prevent texture popin / fade in/ streaming smudge textures. If you are playing vanduul swarm, you can definitely texture fade in if the camera changes quickly... so these are pretty awesome tweaks provided in the link above:
I am using r_TexturesStreamPoolSize = 8192
and
e_ShadowsPoolSize = 4096
Check out that VRAM usage on Arc Corp: mind you, these are 1080p screens...
Dat TitanX VRAM being put through its paces!
Dictator93
Member
Looks fantastic
*sigh*
It's probably just me, but I've developed a more cynical attitude towards these ship sales as Star Citizen's development goes on (and on and on...). I can't deny that it's still an ingenious funding concept and that these concepts are enough to spark the imagination of sci fi fans (it certainly did for me). Or that this might become the ultimate spacegame at some point, although it will have to share that title with Elite for me. It wasn't for nothing that I contemplated buying a Carrack LTI at the end of last year. Back then I imagined how I could get into the ship with a couple of friends (the seamlessness of first person gameplay and multi crew is a great driver for the imagination ^^), go on an exploration trip through the game's universe, land on planets, use the rover to explore them and enjoy the undiscovered sights.
Now, whenever I see concept for some grand exploration ship or the passenger airline spacecraft, I have to wonder when it will get implemented - will it be available in the "1.0" PU release (whenever that is)? Will it be fun at all? Will it in any way live up to the expectation these concept articles are creating? All those youtube videos of people showing off the ships in the hangars or sometimes even just the concept art and static renders and speculating what game mechanics will revolve around them - I kind of get sad seeing them now, whereas I enjoyed them previously.
Unless the game mechanic development for these ships and features is considerable further than CIG is letting on, from the outside it's all speculative at this point. What's the place of a Cutlass or the Constellation Taurus/Andromeda/Aquilla etc. in the metagame? We don't know, because it's all subject to change. If not in the ship's concept phase, then changes in the balancing phase might considerably change the value of these ships. I guess I'm afraid that a multi crew ship from a 300$+ backing package with an exciting narration of exploration and adventure around it, may turn out to be little more than a means to grind for the even bigger ships or - even worse - may turn out to be casual cannon fodder for less peaceful players. Or that something like the passenger airlines - if they get implemented at all for the PU "1.0" release - turn out to be more like Elite's currently implemented missions. Accept one from a list of missions displayed in the spaceport, load your passenger ship with 372 passengers - with the added hassle of hushing all the correctly animated passengers into their seats, take off, make a bee-line for the target destination, chase them out of your spacecraft, collect the payout, repeat. Courier missions in their most basic implementation then.
It's a typical case of unrealistic expections and impatience on my part vs. the reality of game development, I guesss. But I wish I was seeing larger strides on what I personally suspect will eventually be the game's groundwork rather than ultra detailed ship concepts and variations. The groundwork for me being the PU with a narrow set of it's most basic traveling/death/reviving/credit earning and ship control mechanics. If it's those expensive concept sales that'll eventually allow them to lay down the groundwork and perfect it, all more power to them. Without seeing (parts of) the PU at least in a basic working order though, the actual usefulness of many of these ships is too specualtive for me. The closest we got to seeing a bit of the PU was the Gamescom Arena Commander 2.0 demo.
It's probably just me, but I've developed a more cynical attitude towards these ship sales as Star Citizen's development goes on (and on and on...). I can't deny that it's still an ingenious funding concept and that these concepts are enough to spark the imagination of sci fi fans (it certainly did for me). Or that this might become the ultimate spacegame at some point, although it will have to share that title with Elite for me. It wasn't for nothing that I contemplated buying a Carrack LTI at the end of last year. Back then I imagined how I could get into the ship with a couple of friends (the seamlessness of first person gameplay and multi crew is a great driver for the imagination ^^), go on an exploration trip through the game's universe, land on planets, use the rover to explore them and enjoy the undiscovered sights.
Now, whenever I see concept for some grand exploration ship or the passenger airline spacecraft, I have to wonder when it will get implemented - will it be available in the "1.0" PU release (whenever that is)? Will it be fun at all? Will it in any way live up to the expectation these concept articles are creating? All those youtube videos of people showing off the ships in the hangars or sometimes even just the concept art and static renders and speculating what game mechanics will revolve around them - I kind of get sad seeing them now, whereas I enjoyed them previously.
Unless the game mechanic development for these ships and features is considerable further than CIG is letting on, from the outside it's all speculative at this point. What's the place of a Cutlass or the Constellation Taurus/Andromeda/Aquilla etc. in the metagame? We don't know, because it's all subject to change. If not in the ship's concept phase, then changes in the balancing phase might considerably change the value of these ships. I guess I'm afraid that a multi crew ship from a 300$+ backing package with an exciting narration of exploration and adventure around it, may turn out to be little more than a means to grind for the even bigger ships or - even worse - may turn out to be casual cannon fodder for less peaceful players. Or that something like the passenger airlines - if they get implemented at all for the PU "1.0" release - turn out to be more like Elite's currently implemented missions. Accept one from a list of missions displayed in the spaceport, load your passenger ship with 372 passengers - with the added hassle of hushing all the correctly animated passengers into their seats, take off, make a bee-line for the target destination, chase them out of your spacecraft, collect the payout, repeat. Courier missions in their most basic implementation then.
It's a typical case of unrealistic expections and impatience on my part vs. the reality of game development, I guesss. But I wish I was seeing larger strides on what I personally suspect will eventually be the game's groundwork rather than ultra detailed ship concepts and variations. The groundwork for me being the PU with a narrow set of it's most basic traveling/death/reviving/credit earning and ship control mechanics. If it's those expensive concept sales that'll eventually allow them to lay down the groundwork and perfect it, all more power to them. Without seeing (parts of) the PU at least in a basic working order though, the actual usefulness of many of these ships is too specualtive for me. The closest we got to seeing a bit of the PU was the Gamescom Arena Commander 2.0 demo.
Zalusithix
Member
Pulling this back up since it's relevant now... So what variant are you gunning for? Surely the master set!
It's not bad as a base, but the Endeavor certainly gets a bit pricey as you stack on the modules.This is so true. Since they have missed the release for Star Marine by half a year I am getting more and more sceptic about CIGs ability to deliver all the stuff they are promising. While this is not the end of the world (the game might still be great, even if some of the promised features are missing) many concept sale ships depend on these features.
UpDownLeftRight
Banned
I get what you're saying but if anything we have a better idea what role these ships will fit now than we did a year ago. We may not have seen much, but we have seen some implementation from the recent demo and we always get trickles of info from the main site that explain ideas for the mechanics. But honestly, the ships were never there to supply some edge over each other or give you a leg up. Anyone who bought a Connie thinking they're safe from all the auroras and hornets will be disappointed since it's been known for a very long time that skill will be a bigger factor than what ship you fly. We know at least that the balancing will be pushed to support that idea.
It sucks having to wait for it and the hype does slowly deflate during the wait but it is to be expected. I don't even know how long this could take to be honest and I doubt anyone does. It's not just putting together an MMO, it's putting one together that does a large number of things that haven't been done to the depth they want to achieve, whilst being the most visually striking MMO too. All we can really hope is they achieve what they aim for and in at least a reasonable time frame, but even then, it isn't going to be soon.
People really need to understand that tons of stuff that CIG is doing, have not been done before, so they are researched and pioneered by them as development goes.
The software development is hard, and sometimes, or many times, things just dont go as You would like/predicted/expected and You come to bottlenecks or blocks that are really hard to overrun.
Also consider that FPS release delays were caused by different parts of technology than ships design. System for multi-crew handling and FPS animation are completely independent from them, and when done is actually plug&play feature for all already done assets.
The software development is hard, and sometimes, or many times, things just dont go as You would like/predicted/expected and You come to bottlenecks or blocks that are really hard to overrun.
Also consider that FPS release delays were caused by different parts of technology than ships design. System for multi-crew handling and FPS animation are completely independent from them, and when done is actually plug&play feature for all already done assets.
But doesn't that just give these people more reason to be concerned?
I would say that's not true at all. Many games have done a lot of what they're attempting. The difference is they're trying to make it all work together and supposedly seamlessly and I'm not sure how possible that is. They're trying to create multiple types of games and then merge them as well. Types of games that would take a company years to make and make well. Doing this all at once is and was stupid. They should have kept things small and expanded once they had a solid foundation to work with. Then they could keep funding the game by having an actual product to sell instead of these ships.
I still largely wonder if there is any regret on using CryEngine 3 as a base for what they're attempting. The visuals for this game should have been the last thing they went for and it largely looks that is why Roberts went with it instead of what would have been best for making this entire thing work. Regardless of engine they would have had to customize it but it doesn't seem like using CryEngine 3 was the best starting point to customize an engine given what that engine is largely used for and was designed for.
The Endeavor looks really nice. That said the ship sales and for the prices they sell have always bothered me and this one like all other other really big ones makes me sick. People can do whatever they want with their money of course but I still feel it's beyond a waste at this point to keep falling right in line for these sales.
RubberJohnny
Banned
Yeah I think these ship specific gameplay mechanics are just fantasy at this point.
They can't make any of their existing bits like multicrew or shooting on time, with half the features as it is, let alone the 50th new gameplay system that that requires a huge amount of programming and scripting but is only available to a tiny fraction of the audience with a specific ship variant and specific loadout. There's no evidence they've even started developing any of them, or have staff available to do so.
Anyone think there will actually ever be "space court" in the game? Or the Genesis drink mixing and serving minigame? Does anyone actually think they're going do Ben Lesnicks design for Cargo Loading with physically webbing down boxes in your hold and having them come loose and all the physics overhead and netcode overhead that would result? Does anyone think they're really letting the community manager with no understanding of the technical aspects of the game do the game design?
It just feels like a load of ridiculous fluff designed to sell people or keep the audience engaged in theorycrafting rather than stuff they're actually developing.
I get the feeling that like the "ship modules get switched out while you watch while drinking a beer in the cockpit" most of these will disappear from the design the moment someone tots up the man-hours required for implementation.
They can't make any of their existing bits like multicrew or shooting on time, with half the features as it is, let alone the 50th new gameplay system that that requires a huge amount of programming and scripting but is only available to a tiny fraction of the audience with a specific ship variant and specific loadout. There's no evidence they've even started developing any of them, or have staff available to do so.
Anyone think there will actually ever be "space court" in the game? Or the Genesis drink mixing and serving minigame? Does anyone actually think they're going do Ben Lesnicks design for Cargo Loading with physically webbing down boxes in your hold and having them come loose and all the physics overhead and netcode overhead that would result? Does anyone think they're really letting the community manager with no understanding of the technical aspects of the game do the game design?
It just feels like a load of ridiculous fluff designed to sell people or keep the audience engaged in theorycrafting rather than stuff they're actually developing.
I get the feeling that like the "ship modules get switched out while you watch while drinking a beer in the cockpit" most of these will disappear from the design the moment someone tots up the man-hours required for implementation.
Why exactly? From day one of the campaign it was known that this project will be ambitious. This is exactly the reason why many people backed it, to fund a game that was never done before.
Name one multiplayer game that does seemless zoning between many flyable objects please. There is no other game with multi-grid system like SC or 64bit precision to handle the micro to macro scale, or correct 1st person animations.
About CryEngine 3, they could use UE4 but it would require about the same work to customize it or maybe more. Unity would be out of question and writing new one from the ground up would not work at all. Sure, there is a lot of overhead to customize it to their requirement and eliminate all the past-gen code and its definitely annoying for engineers, but trust me that writing it from the ground up would be much harder and time consuming..
--
You know right that different teams are working on those modules? The thing You described is being worked by PU team directed by Tony Zurovec.
Multi-crew handling is being made by S42 team in UK and Germany. While FPS is being made Illfonic.
They have been researching and pioneering for nearly three (?) years now with the end somewhere dimly on the horizon. There also seems to be little plug and play but a lot of non trivial adaption of the base tech and whatnot holding up development. Sure, nice looking hub levels and ships can very much be developed by artists in parallel. The artists are whom I least doubt when it comes to the whole Star Citizen project though.
What can hardly be developed properly in parallel when they're still working out all kinds of basic technology issues, are all manners of things dependent on the ground work:
The above is precisely the impression I'm getting from all the concepts surrounding Star Citizen. My current expectation is for the game to release with only a part of the concept ships and hopefully Squadron 42, but barely all of the mechanics they're dreaming up regularily in those concept sales/articles.
If that should be the case, I'm honestly not going to be disappointed - rather in the contrary. That is, if it happens within the next two years and they manage to get the game's foundation into a good shape. More or quicker would be better of course. Less... well, my personal horror szenario would be that the basic ground work turns out to be severly broken or not that fun when the PU releases. This might bind resources for fixing it, that could otherwise be used for developing the game/service further for one thing.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Illfonic is no longer working on the FPS part, IIRC.
Personally the time issue with the development I have no problem with as long as it is being communicated properly and not setting up unrealistic expectations. I've seen way too many games with great ideas rush aspects that bring down the entire experience. Like with Star Marine I think they have handled the development issues well. They have been communicating their idea for what they want and are showing progress on making work. Doesn't matter how late they are, at least they look like they are on the right track.
To the other points of the mini-games and such with ships that is more frustrating to me because of the complete silence when anyone asks about core game play mechanics of the flight characteristics and model. I could honestly care less about the QTE mining, stewardess simulator or whack-a-mole with ships systems, when the core gameplay is so broken at the moment. Even more troubling is the lack of willingness to even talk (or when they do only to mock backers asking about it) about their vision for it how they expect core game to play. Granted, there is *supposed* to be a design document on the flight model maybe this week, but I'll believe it when I'm two paragraphs in.
RubberJohnny
Banned
PU team is working seemingly entirely on netcode and system locations.
Minigames/roles they don't appear to have even started working on beyond design documents 3 years in:
- trade
- exploration
- industry
- economy
- science
- law and order
- shield management
- radar ops/scanning
- EWAR
- communications
- module overclocking
- salvage
- power management
- avionics
- cpu management
- fire suppression
- flight deck crew
- refinery management
- navigation
- cargo management
- cargo loading
- ship repair
- character interaction
- astronomy
- first aid and surgery
- space tribunal system (!?)
- beverage mixing (!?)
- space dvr repair (!?)
- farm citizen (!?)
Basically the scope is still increasing, despite the lack of stretch goals.
Arma 3? It's at least close to it I think. Chris Roberts even name dropped it in the Gamecom presentation in precisely that context.
As for having players move relative to other moving objects in large scale maps... I don't know, but that that might be the one standout feature that has really not been done before in that scale. Although it wouldn't surprise me, if it actually has been done by some other game before, which doesn't diminish that it's a cool achievement for Star Citizen. It's such a basic basic issue for what they want to achieve though, that I really have to question if it's something to be proud of when the project has been running since 2012. It's basically saying that after three years, they can correctly manage the position of objects on their map. Edit: My cynical side is saying: Congratulations! Well done! Can you move on and start developing the game now? ;-)
I agree with this post. CIG keeps detailing these silly new minigames and systems for brand new playstyles but I'm convinced that it'll take a decade+ to implement it all. KEEP GIVING US MONEY PLS
The cargo design doc is particularly insane. It's ridiculously complicated for very little benefit to the player.
Anton Sugar
Member
Scope Creep: The Game.
Yep, strongly agree.
As much as I want to see SQ42 I kind of want to go into it blind. Actual PU footage is what I'm really after, seeing is believing and all that.
Pulling this back up since it's relevant now... So what variant are you gunning for? Surely the master set!
Yeah, it only works out to be a 10% savings on the Master package - not much of a value proposition there. Regardless, I had an occasion to mark and it happened to work out well.
I hope they are doing some crazy magic there because seeing something like the social module stuck at 24 players at this point seems pretty frightening to me.
Instance size ( when it come to the number of player it will be able to handle ) is still one of my biggest fear when it comes to Star Citizen.
The design doc for the Endeavor's modules is just as crazy as the rest of them. Look at the section on the organics module! LOOK AT IT. Remember, this is a system that will only be used by a very small percentage of the playerbase.
Stop spending money on this game, GAF. At least hold off on ship concepts until CIG proves that they can actually implement any of them.
Stop spending money on this game, GAF. At least hold off on ship concepts until CIG proves that they can actually implement any of them.
Zalusithix
Member
Yeah, it only works out to be a 10% savings on the Master package - not much of a value proposition there. Regardless, I had an occasion to mark and it happened to work out well.
Medical bay and landing bay. Might actually have some use for that Cutlass Red that I CCU'd to for some reason a ways back...
hobblygobbly
Member
Yeah that sort of stuff is only applicable to actual simulators where it has an effect on gameplay (I know there is an actual simulator being made called Rogue System, it takes 10-15 mins to actually get the spaceship up and running like an actual simulator if you're into that).
Will placement of cargo in SC have an effect on centre of gravity, etc? If not its fluff and adds nothing to any form of a gameplay experience, it's just busy work for the sake of it. If designers intend to do things like that you need to have good gameplay reasons. If you want to create a role or mechanic of "load masters" then cargo placement needs to have an effect on the gameplay mechanics - from what I'm aware of in SC centre of gravity is not changing based on cargo or any other factors (maybe that may change, who knows). It's straight up the typical 100% fluff that sounds good as an idea but practically isn't fun and adds nothing. A core aspect I've read of game design is the core gameplay experience, if mechanics do not aid it in a meaningful manner then it's not worth it and can straight up hinder the experience. The cargo thing is a prime example of it.
Xplatformer
Member
Why do you need more than 24 pcs in an instance? Especially if there are also npcs walking around?
Because that's... really small ? in 'cities' it's no too bad even thought it mean you pretty much can't even make a mid sized guild meet in a single instance.
But what I meant by that is the instance limitation in any scenario, space included. The early talk are/were of the 50-100 player range, and I do think that any less than 50 would be really disapointing, I want "big" ( even if not eve online big, I know how impossible that would be ) battle between players to be a real possibility.
Anton Sugar
Member
I think it depends on the size of the playable spaces and what you can do in them. 24 players would be a lot for Destiny's small hubs/social spaces, but might be way too few in a much larger and expansive area.
Xplatformer
Member
I'm glad you brought up Destiny as a comparison. Chris has alluded to AI npcs playing a role in the every day activities of the pu. Ai npcs are non existent in the tower. In fact t he ai in that game is limited to just combat.
Personally i don't need to see more than 24 pcs running around or camping in my instance.
Give me some smart npcs please.
Is there any info on how they plan to realize encounters in space? Say you've got a 24- player limit, just because the number was mentioned. Pack a Redeemer or other transport oriented ship with players and you almost got half of that in a single ship. Not to mention cruisers or other big ships, which should be able to carry as many players alone.
Zalusithix
Member
Given some ships have pretty high crew requirements, you'll need more than 24 players if you want more than a couple of the larger ships in an instance.
Edit: Beaten by Burny
I actually dont see anything development intensive in Organic design. I mean, if it doesnt have very complex visual representation of those mechanics, it should be one/two man job.
People really forgets that many system based indie games are made by max several people and that includes art, sound and engine programming.
I mean, think about games like:
Banished (made by one guy)
Factorio (made by 5 guys)
Starbound (made by 5 guys)
Stardrive (made by one guy)
Sol 0 Mars Colonization (made by one guy) - this actually has some similar mechanics as described in Organic section for farming and bacteria mutations
FTL (made by two guys)
Unturned (made by one guy)
etc, You get my idea.
---
Arma 3 was mentioned as something with decent animations in 1st/3st person, but thats about it and Arma 3 is actually FAR from the SC goal and it doesnt even have Zero-G animations.
You dont get the idea behind those technologies and the quote about local grids being minor issue is perfect example of that. Its the most important feature to make multi-crew to work and its a basis for anything in SC.
And You dont start researching and prototyping advanced stuff (even though its core functionality) without some fundamentals. There are prerequisites for everything in software development and of course You also forgetting that they started without studios. Training and hiring people is also a very long process. Just hiring process takes like two months generally for a person from CV to on-boarding, then it takes like 2-4 months to teach him/her to the state that he/she is completely useful and independent.
RubberJohnny
Banned
They've still got to develop effectively 3 different indie games for each new ship that they're creating - that's huge scope creep, and unless you're going to have low-poly or pixel assets sitting next to high poly ones, it is going to be a bigger job than one or two man.
There's a big breakdown of old promises here, and it includes far more than that list of mine: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitize...ping_em_honest_take_ii_a_breakdown_of_claims/. They don't seem to have completed a single one in the last year.
All those 10FTC links really emphasize that Chris just says stuff and then immediately forgets it. Run your own business! Shuttles for big ships down to planets! Changeable ship gravity! Player characters ageing! Ancestral trees for your characters! Play as other alien races! Player influenced politics! Engine tuning! Your own personal R2D2 repair bot companion! Managing your ship from your onboard bed! Space creatures!
There's a big breakdown of old promises here, and it includes far more than that list of mine: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitize...ping_em_honest_take_ii_a_breakdown_of_claims/. They don't seem to have completed a single one in the last year.
All those 10FTC links really emphasize that Chris just says stuff and then immediately forgets it. Run your own business! Shuttles for big ships down to planets! Changeable ship gravity! Player characters ageing! Ancestral trees for your characters! Play as other alien races! Player influenced politics! Engine tuning! Your own personal R2D2 repair bot companion! Managing your ship from your onboard bed! Space creatures!
What ship assets have to do with game systems? Programmers and designers do not create art.
And what '3 different indie games for each new ships'? All cargo based ships will benefit from cargo ships mechanics, all science ships (and laboratories on planets probably too) will benefit from science ships mechanics, all EWAR ships will benefit from EWAR mechanics.
Most of the stuff on the list You posted come from PU, some are even essential to even have it working, some are not even for alpha or beta release.
Anton Sugar
Member
I think RubberJohnny is saying that the systems to be programmed/designed are only part of the equation. If the level of fidelity that CR desires is to be executed, then the development of assets and how they integrate with the systems has to be a consideration.
I mean, in terms of organic assets, that's potentially:
-Models for all the different types of plants and vegetables that can be planted
--Not only different models for different types of planets/vegetables, but different states for each of the models: the plants start as buds, then grow through multiple stages, then mature or ripen, then shed or die, etc. Again, if low fidelity was desired, this could just be a simply 2-3 model progression per plant
-Potential models/textures for the different types of soil you have or need
-The rest: growth lights, the beds for the plants, etc.
A sprite or series of sprites in a 2D indie game is a different beast than a AAA 3D game, let alone at CR's standards.
I mean, in terms of organic assets, that's potentially:
-Models for all the different types of plants and vegetables that can be planted
--Not only different models for different types of planets/vegetables, but different states for each of the models: the plants start as buds, then grow through multiple stages, then mature or ripen, then shed or die, etc. Again, if low fidelity was desired, this could just be a simply 2-3 model progression per plant
-Potential models/textures for the different types of soil you have or need
-The rest: growth lights, the beds for the plants, etc.
A sprite or series of sprites in a 2D indie game is a different beast than a AAA 3D game, let alone at CR's standards.
I look at that $500 ship and I just get sad. It looks like something that even if I played I'd likely never get to own it. Obviously I could be wrong since we know very little about how this will actually play out, but a ship worth that much will have to be somewhat unique and rather exclusive?
Anton Sugar
Member
Pretty sure you can get any of these games in-game without spending actual money, just through regular progression or in-game currency.
Zalusithix
Member
All ships can be obtained in game, though the effort needed to acquire them will obviously differ.
That said, you don't need to own every ship. Most of the expensive ships are large multi-crew beasts that'll require anywhere from a few, to a dozen plus people to fully man. Not everybody will need something like an Endeavor. Just being in the same organization where one is present will give opportunities to work on it.
That said, you don't need to own every ship. Most of the expensive ships are large multi-crew beasts that'll require anywhere from a few, to a dozen plus people to fully man. Not everybody will need something like an Endeavor. Just being in the same organization where one is present will give opportunities to work on it.
Yeah, nothing's permanently locked behind a paywall. Getting them via pledging is just a head start. Even something like the Constellation Pheonix should be available in game somewhere, although it might be hard to find.
Yeah, trying to run an Endeavour solo for producing goods would be a terrible idea. It's just begging to be picked apart by pirates. It should have some of the highest value cargo around (maybe not much of it at a time compared to a trade ship) and it's poorly armed.
I'm not going to debate the finer points of feature creep, but Chris Roberts has always been pretty clear about Star Citizen being a 10+ years project and the fact that some (most?) features wouldn't make it into the game at the PU's launch and would in fact only come online further (years?) down the road.
They obviously have their work cut out for them and then some, but, like, some of the features you listed don't exactly scream "impossible", once you have all the basics covered. I think what's in store for Elite: Dangerous's expansion early next year is a fair indicator of that.
Dictator93
Member
Wait a minute guys, are you telling me the most ambitious game ever made is not going to be out after citizen con?
Shit, I thought the game I would be playing for the next ten years would be built in a day.
Shit, I thought the game I would be playing for the next ten years would be built in a day.
The whole world was built in 7. So I don't think people's expectations are unrealistic
Nah, it's going to be out after Citizen Con.
Many years after Citizen Con, which technically is still after Citizen Con.
OH SNAP
- Status