******Official Star Citizen / Squadron 42 Thread******

TNA said:
I don’t think it will fail. At the very least we will get Squadron 42 which would be fine by me.

Star Citizen probably won’t hit beta for another 2 years judging by what I have seen, but I am hoping they can finish Squadron 42 by end of next year. It will shut a load of mouths at least :D
Click to expand...

I don't care when they finishes SQ42, I also don't really care about those moaning constantly. I'd like the game to come out when it's ready in the eyes of those behind it, much like Rimworld has. There is no point punting it out just to silence critics, because firstly it won't - some will never be happy with what they get and secondly many aren't the target audience anyway.

The game is big enough not to need them IMHO, bonus if they change their minds but certainly no longer necessary. Let them bitch and whinge about it.
 
Raumarik said:
I don't care when they finishes SQ42, I also don't really care about those moaning constantly. I'd like the game to come out when it's ready in the eyes of those behind it, much like Rimworld has. There is no point punting it out just to silence critics, because firstly it won't - some will never be happy with what they get and secondly many aren't the target audience anyway.

The game is big enough not to need them IMHO, bonus if they change their minds but certainly no longer necessary. Let them bitch and whinge about it.
Click to expand...
I care! I want play SQ42 ASAP damn it! :p

But yeah I agree. I would rather wait for a polished game then for them to rush due to pressure and release it with bugs etc.

But being a single player game, they should be able to finish that at least a couple of years before SC imo.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Exactly.we don't pay again.all backers who paid don't pay again when it's released
Click to expand...

You're not getting what he's saying though. He's saying you've already paid for the game and development. The game isn't free for you when it releases. There may well have been other special bonuses for whatever scheme you backed, but paying for that backing included a copy of the game on release. When Cyberpunk's development is finished, we purchase the finished product and, to a certain degree, know what we're then paying for. None of us have had to stump up any cash right now.

It seems that in this thread, the general consensus from backers is that anyone criticising the game automatically wants it to fail. I don't think that's the case for a lot of us. It certainly isn't for me. But I do feel like CIG are taking people for mugs and I wonder where it's going to stop. It's been years and the same old stuff comes back around over and over again, with delays, changes, expectations not met etc. I don't really want to see loyal fans get shafted because the studio feels like it has an endless stream of money coming in and can just do whatever they want. At the moment it's all at the expense of the backers and the developers aren't being held accountable for any of it. And ultimately, if the worst should happen and it should completely fail, who loses out? The backers and fans, which really sucks. If a studio developing a game series that a publisher funds goes bust, the only thing we lose out is the release of the game. Nobody is invested.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's hard to see how many of you still have faith in the game and studio after how badly the entire project has been managed. Or am I just way off base with those thoughts?
 
CHokKA said:
You're not getting what he's saying though. He's saying you've already paid for the game and development. The game isn't free for you when it releases. There may well have been other special bonuses for whatever scheme you backed, but paying for that backing included a copy of the game on release. When Cyberpunk's development is finished, we purchase the finished product and, to a certain degree, know what we're then paying for. None of us have had to stump up any cash right now.

It seems that in this thread, the general consensus from backers is that anyone criticising the game automatically wants it to fail. I don't think that's the case for a lot of us. It certainly isn't for me. But I do feel like CIG are taking people for mugs and I wonder where it's going to stop. It's been years and the same old stuff comes back around over and over again, with delays, changes, expectations not met etc. I don't really want to see loyal fans get shafted because the studio feels like it has an endless stream of money coming in and can just do whatever they want. At the moment it's all at the expense of the backers and the developers aren't being held accountable for any of it. And ultimately, if the worst should happen and it should completely fail, who loses out? The backers and fans, which really sucks. If a studio developing a game series that a publisher funds goes bust, the only thing we lose out is the release of the game. Nobody is invested.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's hard to see how many of you still have faith in the game and studio after how badly the entire project has been managed. Or am I just way off base with those thoughts?
Click to expand...

I think when reading certain posts they certainly do feel like they want it to fail. They come over as “they let me down, now I am upset so the hell with them, I hope they fail!” :p

Obviously not everyone feels that way and maybe those who post this way their posts are not reflective of what they actually feel? Who knows. I am not even bothered to be honest. I will probably step back out of this thread and come back in 11 to 12 months time again and see what has changed :D
 
CHokKA said:
You're not getting what he's saying though. He's saying you've already paid for the game and development. The game isn't free for you when it releases. There may well have been other special bonuses for whatever scheme you backed, but paying for that backing included a copy of the game on release. When Cyberpunk's development is finished, we purchase the finished product and, to a certain degree, know what we're then paying for. None of us have had to stump up any cash right now.

It seems that in this thread, the general consensus from backers is that anyone criticising the game automatically wants it to fail. I don't think that's the case for a lot of us. It certainly isn't for me. But I do feel like CIG are taking people for mugs and I wonder where it's going to stop. It's been years and the same old stuff comes back around over and over again, with delays, changes, expectations not met etc. I don't really want to see loyal fans get shafted because the studio feels like it has an endless stream of money coming in and can just do whatever they want. At the moment it's all at the expense of the backers and the developers aren't being held accountable for any of it. And ultimately, if the worst should happen and it should completely fail, who loses out? The backers and fans, which really sucks. If a studio developing a game series that a publisher funds goes bust, the only thing we lose out is the release of the game. Nobody is invested.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's hard to see how many of you still have faith in the game and studio after how badly the entire project has been managed. Or am I just way off base with those thoughts?
Click to expand...
Your way off.

Many games are developed like this Case point a game called squad and more recently fortnight and pobg that where both in alpha state for a while
 
jonneymendoza said:
Your way off.

Many games are developed like this Case point a game called squad and more recently fortnight and pobg that where both in alpha state for a while
Click to expand...

You say I'm way off, but you don't specifically state what I'm way off about, or why I'm way off, so I don't really get what you're referring to here. Perhaps you'd care to elaborate? To respond broadly, I don't know of many games that have had so many development ups and downs. Do you know of any that have been delayed as much? Initial release was originally stated to be 2014. Four years later and some are speculating in here that it's at least another two years away. What other games using this same funding model have had such significant delays? The most infamous game I can remember to suffer delays of similar magnitude is Duke Nukem Forever, and that was an utter flop. In fact, most games that have suffered such huge delays were failures upon release. Isn't that a worrying trend?

Your example of Fortnite isn't anything like Star Citizen. Nobody paid to fund that, and it's turned out to be an extremely successful game on the back of their multiplayer mode. The single player is a forgettable experience, but the multiplayer has exploded, and it's also free, so I don't really get the comparison.
 
I am an original backer from 2011 (didn't realise it had been 7 years). As chokka said above the target was for a 2014 release, they missed every target for the first few years then just started a new timeline. My fear with this is that it has just turned into a vanity project with an ever increasing list of things that aren't going to get done, they should have released what they have first promised then moved on to adding the extra stuff.
 
CHokKA said:
You say I'm way off, but you don't specifically state what I'm way off about, or why I'm way off, so I don't really get what you're referring to here. Perhaps you'd care to elaborate? To respond broadly, I don't know of many games that have had so many development ups and downs. Do you know of any that have been delayed as much? Initial release was originally stated to be 2014. Four years later and some are speculating in here that it's at least another two years away. What other games using this same funding model have had such significant delays? The most infamous game I can remember to suffer delays of similar magnitude is Duke Nukem Forever, and that was an utter flop. In fact, most games that have suffered such huge delays were failures upon release. Isn't that a worrying trend?

Your example of Fortnite isn't anything like Star Citizen. Nobody paid to fund that, and it's turned out to be an extremely successful game on the back of their multiplayer mode. The single player is a forgettable experience, but the multiplayer has exploded, and it's also free, so I don't really get the comparison.
Click to expand...
Basically there has been other games where you bought alpha state game and see it develop into a fully fledge game years down the line.

Right now they are heading into the right direction. they release quarter update milestones
 
jonneymendoza said:
Basically there has been other games where you bought alpha state game and see it develop into a fully fledge game years down the line.

Right now they are heading into the right direction. they release quarter update milestones
Click to expand...

The first part of the beta was released 4 years ago yet we are still quite far of getting the actual game that was promised. They might be heading in the right direction but how long is it going to take to get there? Another 4 years?
 
jonneymendoza said:
Basically there has been other games where you bought alpha state game and see it develop into a fully fledge game years down the line.

Right now they are heading into the right direction. they release quarter update milestones
Click to expand...

You're being very vague with your responses and I'm not really sure why. If you're referring to early access, it isn't really the same though is it? You don't buy into an idea by backing words on a page and having a few screenshots, and then have as many delays to the development with barely a working product to play. I've backed Subnautica and Astroneer (£7.50 for Subnautica and £12.49 for Astroneer). Subnautica was released earlier this year, and Astroneer is looking at being a release sometime this year or early next year. Subnautica was amazingly playable in the early access state, and Astroneer is as well. Granted, it's not the same vision and scope as Star Citizen, but they're also far smaller development teams working on these games and for what they both do as games, I'd say that they're quite groundbreaking. With these two titles, I knew what I was buying into when I bought them because they were in a completely playable state with the groundwork laid out when I bought them on Steam. At the moment, nobody really knows what's going on with Star Citizen in terms of the development because the goalposts keep changing all the time. Has the much discussed object container streaming been put into the game yet? Wasn't that supposed to be in within this latest update but that's now changed again?

Going back to your post, what other games are you referring to that have worked this way? Have they suffered delays on the same scale as Star Citizen? I very much doubt it.
 
Calin Banc said:
The panels in which they're talking about the tech behind are really impressive and show how much is going one behind the curtains: building the NPCs and animating them, AI, physics (reminding of Physix), flight model, gameplay and so on. At least they do try to give us something special.

https://www.youtube.com/user/RobertsSpaceInd/videos
Click to expand...


There's no doubt what they're doing looks great.. and the game if/when it's released will look amazing.
5 or 6 years ago when I put my money in my life was completely different from what it is now.. had the game been released on time I'd have had time enough to play and actually get my monies worth from what I gave them...
 
At some point, if I remember correctly, there was a question for either expand the goal of the game or take it to market ASAP. Most of the backers that answered back then were in favor of that expansion. Personally I'm glad they did, but I do understand why others may feel different.

It looks likes parts of their core tech are being completed which should be speed up the game development.
 
dave1180 said:
There's no doubt what they're doing looks great.. and the game if/when it's released will look amazing.
5 or 6 years ago when I put my money in my life was completely different from what it is now.. had the game been released on time I'd have had time enough to play and actually get my monies worth from what I gave them...
Click to expand...

I only paid the £25 or £30 that got the basic game package all the way back then. As long as I get something playable I'll be happy.
 
Calin Banc said:
https://youtu.be/HjHn0iUpBVE?t=774

And it doest it without proprietary (physx) tech.
Click to expand...

Yeah, actually Cryengine has had that for years, they use Bullet Physics which is what i suspect that is.
It was first developed by Erwin Coumans, later AMD took over and developed it further as an open source alternative to PhysX, at that point it ended up in Cryengine (Crysis 3 specifically) with Ridged Body, Soft Body (Cloth) and water simulation Physics, as well as other AMD co-developed features such as Ray Traced Real Time reflections, Ray Traced Global illumination, do they sound familiar?

Some of my own messing about with Bullet Physics in Cryengine, this is years old now but...

Ridged Body


Start:
Soft Body grass Wind Simulation, also from shooting at the grass, its the same as Cloth.
At about 1m Raytraces Real-time Reflection.
1m 20sec Ridged Body Physics suspended by Softbody (The lamp on a flexy cord) also see the speckles bounce off the ground.
Cloth at 2m 20sec
3m 20sec more Ridged Body Physics, the wall.
Last the explosion from the fist vid.



More Bullet Physics.




Nvidia didn't invent nor have the monopoly on PhysX, they just made you use their Hardware.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom