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

dlknight said:
Long time ED player, I've dipped in and out of Star Citizen several times after supporting it way back when it was originally announced.

IMHO I didn't get the same level of immersion in Star Citizen as ED, everything in ED has a similar interface and is extremely intuitive to use, e.g. the Station menu, missions, route navigation, system maps.

In contrast Star Citizen just felt clunky and definitely not intuitive or with an easy to use interface.

Interested to hear if any of this has improved in the last 12 months? I understand that the latest release is a hot mess from some YT videos I've watched.
Click to expand...

They have improved the user inventory interface a lot, it is much less clunky to use, tho it still needs work.

I have about 600 hours in ED, i somewhat agree with you about the general UI and useability of it ED vs SC, but i wouldn't call ED's UI immediately intuitive, it was something that i had to get used to before i could navigate it confidently. SC's UI is no less intuative, you want to take a bounty hunter contract? Its F1 > Contracts > bounty hunter > accept one from the list.
You want to get to the contract location? F2 to open star map, in the top right corner there is a yellow chevron highlighting your contract, click on it and the map will automatically calculate your rout, lock it in and go, done, does that seem familier?

New players get confused by this simply because there is no tutorial for it, just as there wasn't in ED when i started playing that back in 2018 or whatever it was..,,,

What i will say is Star Citizens start map as a tool to use by its self is bloody awful, it looks naff, it is very clunky, it need scrapping altogether and starting from scratch.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
They have improved the user inventory interface a lot, it is much less clunky to use, tho it still needs work.

I have about 600 hours in ED, i somewhat agree with you about the general UI and useability of it ED vs SC, but i wouldn't call ED's UI immediately intuitive, it was something that i had to get used to before i could navigate it confidently. SC's UI is no less intuative, you want to take a bounty hunter contract? Its F1 > Contracts > bounty hunter > accept one from the list.
You want to get to the contract location? F2 to open star map, in the top right corner there is a yellow chevron highlighting your contract, click on it and the map will automatically calculate your rout, lock it in and go, done, does that seem familier?

New players get confused by this simply because there is no tutorial for it, just as there wasn't in ED when i started playing that back in 2018 or whatever it was..,,,

What i will say is Star Citizens start map as a tool to use by its self is bloody awful, it looks naff, it is very clunky, it need scrapping altogether and starting from scratch.
Click to expand...
Thanks @humbug - I might take another look at it later this week (I've got 1300 hours in ED).
 
When these people who have been invited to play Squadron 42 in October report back my hope it that the Star Map has had a complete overhaul and is very much better than the ugly clunky old crap we have now.

Because i'll tell you what, not just for Star Citizen getting that new map..... if that map is in Squadron 42 the gamer press will have a field day and rightfully so, normie gamers will find that star map intolerable.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
When these people who have been invited to play Squadron 42 in October report back my hope it that the Star Map has had a complete overhaul and is very much better than the ugly clunky old crap we have now.

Because i'll tell you what, not just for Star Citizen getting that new map..... if that map is in Squadron 42 the gamer press will have a field day and rightfully so, normie gamers will find that star map intolerable.
Click to expand...

Surely “normie gamers” wouldn’t even touch the game?
 
humbug said:
There are over 6.5 million of us, we can't all be 'special'
Click to expand...

6.5m unique accounts who preordered or want to play SQ42? Or a number reported on with no additional context to sway a narrative?

I hope it turns out good but, even just here a few have shown they have no interest in it, and even see it as a hinderance to the development of SC. Not long to go anyway until we find out (assuming release date doesn’t change) we’re already moving towards the tail end of the year in 9 days.

Be cool if it supports sticks too, and there’s enough space combat to warrant setting them up. Hopefully fewer binds than sc or I’ll be playing it in 2028
 
Last edited:
Noxia said:
6.5m unique accounts who preordered or want to play SQ42? Or a number reported on with no additional context to sway a narrative?

I hope it turns out good but, even just here a few have shown they have no interest in it, and even see it as a hinderance to the development of SC. Not long to go anyway until we find out (assuming release date doesn’t change) we’re already moving towards the tail end of the year in 9 days.

Be cool if it supports sticks too, and there’s enough space combat to warrant setting them up. Hopefully fewer binds than sc or I’ll be playing it in 2028
Click to expand...

It still says "Launches 2026"


This thing in October.... apparently a lot of press have also been invited, my hope this Squadron42con as it maybe, it is taking place on the exact date of the now cancelled Citizencon..... is the start of the marketing campaign.

No i'm not holding that hope up, but it is significant.
 
The 6.5 million comes from how many Star Citizen accounts there are. As of right now 6,592,031
 
Last edited:
Star Citizen started as crowdfunded in 2012, I was one of those backers. It has now reportedly crossed $1 billion raised from players, over nearly 14 years, and it still does not feel like anywhere near finished.

The dev's are always quick to release some expensive ship for players to buy, so they can rake in more cash, they need to stop adding more content and finish and fix what they already have.

If I new the state of the game 14 years on I would never of backed it.
 
UnknownDonut said:
Star Citizen started as crowdfunded in 2012, I was one of those backers. It has now reportedly crossed $1 billion raised from players, over nearly 14 years, and it still does not feel like anywhere near finished.

The dev's are always quick to release some expensive ship for players to buy, so they can rake in more cash, they need to stop adding more content and finish and fix what they already have.

If I new the state of the game 14 years on I would never of backed it.
Click to expand...

You're not the only one saying this, they have just stabilised a broken 4.8, even then there is still a lot wrong with it and already 4.9 is in the start of its release phase, its due in about 2 or 3 weeks.

I will say this, that patch has nothing to do with any ship sales, most patches aren't, its adding new tech, i know what this is, they have said what this is, they have a 1.0 roadmap and they are in a mad crunch trying to stick to a schedule.

I would rather they just stop for a bit, fix everything and then not add anything new until its been tested so much they cannot find a thing wrong with it, ship sales are not going to stop, its how they fund the development and ship sales are NOT dependant of patches, at all, they can drop a new ship at any time and often do.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
When these people who have been invited to play Squadron 42 in October report back my hope it that the Star Map has had a complete overhaul and is very much better than the ugly clunky old crap we have now.

Because i'll tell you what, not just for Star Citizen getting that new map..... if that map is in Squadron 42 the gamer press will have a field day and rightfully so, normie gamers will find that star map intolerable.
Click to expand...

As far as I understand things the mad dash of patches and tech is to reach parity with the proposed release of SQ42. Or atleast that's what makes sense to me. They surely don't want them feeling like 2 separate games and want people to easily slip into SC once they've completed the single player. I suspect then a lot of the tech/features will be implemented in a post SQ42 patch.

I genuinely hope this is the case and that it will be successful otherwise they'll fail at on boarding a lot of potential new players.
 
humbug said:
I would rather they just stop for a bit, fix everything and then not add anything new until its been tested so much they cannot find a thing wrong with it, ship sales are not going to stop, its how they fund the development and ship sales are NOT dependant of patches, at all, they can drop a new ship at any time and often do.
Click to expand...
Im the reverse, i rather they continue to add new core tech and then once all core tech is in, then fix it.`

Because hey look, they have stabalised 4.8, what do you think is going to happen once instancing comes in? or dynamic economy? dynamic server meshing? malestrone? Base building?

Theres a god awful lot of core tech and features that will EASILY undo all the bug fixing they spent time doing instead of just finishing the above features ASAP.

Listen, bugs suck , it really does but in a normal development of a any game, its done behind closed doors. Dont think that Rockstar aint having similar if not worse issues with there developlent of GTA6. you and i just dont hear about it or see it.... But trust be brudda, They like every single game company goes through a lot of **** during development
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
Im the reverse, i rather they continue to add new core tech and then once all core tech is in, then fix it.`

Because hey look, they have stabalised 4.8, what do you think is going to happen once instancing comes in? or dynamic economy? dynamic server meshing? malestrone? Base building?

Theres a god awful lot of core tech and features that will EASILY undo all the bug fixing they spent time doing instead of just finishing the above features ASAP.

Listen, bugs suck , it really does but in a normal development of a any game, its done behind closed doors. Dont think that Rockstar aint having similar if not worse issues with there developlent of GTA6. you and i just dont hear about it or see it.... But trust be brudda, They like every single game company goes through a lot of **** during development
Click to expand...
I get the logic, honestly. No point spending months fixing bugs if the next major bit of tech is going to come in and break it all again.

But with Star Citizen, that argument has been running for years now.

It’s always “once server meshing is done”, “once persistence is done”, “once instancing is in”, “once Maelstrom is in”, “once base building is in”. At some point you have to ask how, after 14 years and that much money, there is still always another massive core system needed before the game can properly settle down.

GTA 6 having development problems behind closed doors isn’t the same thing. We haven’t been funding GTA 6 for over a decade while Rockstar sells us concept cars.

That’s my issue with it. Not that bugs exist. Bugs are expected. It’s that the project has been publicly sold and monetised for years by customers, while still being able to hide behind “it’s not finished yet”.

That might be normal development technically, but it’s not normal from a customer point of view.
 
UnknownDonut said:
I get the logic, honestly. No point spending months fixing bugs if the next major bit of tech is going to come in and break it all again.

But with Star Citizen, that argument has been running for years now.

It’s always “once server meshing is done”, “once persistence is done”, “once instancing is in”, “once Maelstrom is in”, “once base building is in”. At some point you have to ask how, after 14 years and that much money, there is still always another massive core system needed before the game can properly settle down.

GTA 6 having development problems behind closed doors isn’t the same thing. We haven’t been funding GTA 6 for over a decade while Rockstar sells us concept cars.

That’s my issue with it. Not that bugs exist. Bugs are expected. It’s that the project has been publicly sold and monetised for years by customers, while still being able to hide behind “it’s not finished yet”.

That might be normal development technically, but it’s not normal from a customer point of view.
Click to expand...
14 years ago, CIG as we know it today did not exist.

CR and a handful of people setup shop in his garage with a vision, no engine, no fancy offices with thousands of employees, nothing.

It took CIG approx 4 years to finalise a base engine to work on(cryengine) and slowly building a team capable of making SC and SQ42( i think by 2016 they have 300-400 devs? from about 10-15 people in 2012.).

They had to completely gut out teh cryEngine and rewrite basically the whole thing, from the network layer to the rendering layer. everything has been totally rewritten. Toss in the fact that they are working on two games, one being an MMO that nowadays takes approx 10 years to make is quite something.

Look i am not making excuses, CIG have mis managed a lot and i mean a lot. and if it wasnt for the mis managing of both games, SQ42 would have come out like two years ago and SC 1.0 would be about nearly ready and in a much better state.

But it is what it is, once all the core tech are in, CIG cant hide anymore and they hopefully can start polishing it properly and adding content.

CIG have already done some incredible things. The server meshing tech is absolutely next level. no player has ever notice them traveling through different servers. no loading screens, everything seamless and the size and fidelity of the universe with 3 star systems is unmatched right now..

Mix that in with some really brain dead decisoons and issues as well though!

What will make this game fail is CIG themselves. It wont be GTA6 or guild wars 3 etc that will make this game fail. it will be CIG themselves
 
Last edited:
Vidar said:
As far as I understand things the mad dash of patches and tech is to reach parity with the proposed release of SQ42. Or atleast that's what makes sense to me. They surely don't want them feeling like 2 separate games and want people to easily slip into SC once they've completed the single player. I suspect then a lot of the tech/features will be implemented in a post SQ42 patch.

I genuinely hope this is the case and that it will be successful otherwise they'll fail at on boarding a lot of potential new players.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's exactly it, they want people buying SQ42 discovering the MMO and it being somewhat of a viable product, not a broken unfinished mess, the problem is for as much tech, features and content they have been smashing out over 2025 and continuing this year the game its self is becoming more and more broken as they are not stopping to insure any realistic Q&A, its stick to the schedule and fix problems when its published, rinse, repeat, keep crunching on it.

The problem with that is eventually problems accumulate to the point where the whole thing becomes unplayable, that's what 4.8 became.

Stop! Fix it, polish it... then move on and only if the next patch has had adequate Q&A, people coming off the back of SQ42 will find an unfinished game but at least it will be playable.
 
UnknownDonut said:
Star Citizen started as crowdfunded in 2012, I was one of those backers. It has now reportedly crossed $1 billion raised from players, over nearly 14 years, and it still does not feel like anywhere near finished.

The dev's are always quick to release some expensive ship for players to buy, so they can rake in more cash, they need to stop adding more content and finish and fix what they already have.

If I new the state of the game 14 years on I would never of backed it.
Click to expand...
was there too, still have the Golden Ticket. Was promised "world war 2 dogfights in space" and now we (half)have racing and correct soil. even if the game released tomorrow i don't think i'd bother.
 
Played around a bit. The game feels extremely unsmooth and unresponsive to me, especially after playing ED. They really need to focus on improving that because it isn't very playable I don't think. They have used very large texture sizes which might be part of the issue.
 
I purchased some ships a good few years ago now and some of them still haven't even entered the white box phase, it is ridiculous.

That and now as it has been in development so long, they are having to come full circle and redo the early stuff, because it looks crap now.
 
Ran in to a game breaking bug already lol. Ship won't take off and is stuck to the floor, no reason for it, just nope. I can see thrusters fire but won't move.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom