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

Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,635
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
To Expand on that ^^^^^, when you buy ships now what your doing is donating to the development costs of the game, you don't need to buy these ships as you will be able to buy them through in-game currency which you earn playing the game.

You get whatever ship for whatever money as something in return for that donation to use in your early access to the game, there is some debate as to what happens with your account value once the game goes live, the consensus is you will have a choice to keep your ships or melt them for in-game currency.

So don't buy ships now thinking you needed to if you want said ship for when the game goes live, you'll get it for free, you would just have to work for it.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Jun 2013
Posts
4,372
i know how the gist works, i've been in since the original kickstart, i just thought there was one of the military [Retaliator?] ones they offered that would not be buyable in-game, due to it being military. i'm probably misremembering, TBH the shine's gone off the game for me now.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
14 Jul 2003
Posts
14,494
You should always be able to get a ship in game. doesn't mean you can always buy from a dealer though, may need to steal it. I can't think of any ship that's been on sale that won't be able to get except potentially the newer version of the hornet for squadron 42 although that's never been sold.


Bear in mind that the ships are purely to fund development, post release that option most likely won't be there are they'll be raising funds for continued development via other means.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2012
Posts
4,146
Location
Oxfordshire
Having fun reading the comments on some of the newer news posts now that some of the press have checked out 3.0 in it's current state. Surprisingly CAT-THE-FIFTH over on hexus.net has some amazingly inaccurate posts and using Derek Smart as a good reason that SC is going to go boom suddenly and they are all liars and cheaters and scams.

Ah well, 3.0 looks like it's coming on well overall and they certainly appear to be moving forward if they finally have press going to see the 3.0 build so that is good news.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,635
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Having fun reading the comments on some of the newer news posts now that some of the press have checked out 3.0 in it's current state. Surprisingly CAT-THE-FIFTH over on hexus.net has some amazingly inaccurate posts and using Derek Smart as a good reason that SC is going to go boom suddenly and they are all liars and cheaters and scams.

Ah well, 3.0 looks like it's coming on well overall and they certainly appear to be moving forward if they finally have press going to see the 3.0 build so that is good news.

That name gets about a bit... one here, one as a mod on another forum.... or are they all the same guy?

Do you have a link?
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2012
Posts
4,146
Location
Oxfordshire
That name gets about a bit... one here, one as a mod on another forum.... or are they all the same guy?

Do you have a link?

CAT-THE-FIFTH on here and on there is the same person. That is why I thought it was funny. CAT appears to miss the point where in pre-alpha and working through the technical things change and the dates provided for release in 2014 was based on the Kick Starter, then that of course moved as people wanted more so they added more and gave 2016.

Then in 2015 they cracked Procedural generation for planets and since then we haven't had release dates. Mentions a 2017 release date but am not aware of release unless CAT on about 3.0 which isn't really release.

Also mentions that it was £40 to back it back then but I only paid £25 myself and have access to all of it when anything gets released so I don't personally find that easy to back up either. Yeah it is more now but that is generally how it works till games are released.

Using the usual 'Promise' argument but failing to see the difference blah blah. There is a pretty graph that Derek Smart made that they posted though that is funny as that is apparently the obvious that shows this is a massive cash grab.

Comments section here: http://hexus.net/gaming/news/pc/108211-star-citizen-alpha-3-teaser-video-shows-moon-landings/
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,635
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
CAT-THE-FIFTH on here and on there is the same person. That is why I thought it was funny. CAT appears to miss the point where in pre-alpha and working through the technical things change and the dates provided for release in 2014 was based on the Kick Starter, then that of course moved as people wanted more so they added more and gave 2016.

Then in 2015 they cracked Procedural generation for planets and since then we haven't had release dates. Mentions a 2017 release date but am not aware of release unless CAT on about 3.0 which isn't really release.

Also mentions that it was £40 to back it back then but I only paid £25 myself and have access to all of it when anything gets released so I don't personally find that easy to back up either. Yeah it is more now but that is generally how it works till games are released.

Using the usual 'Promise' argument but failing to see the difference blah blah. There is a pretty graph that Derek Smart made that they posted though that is funny as that is apparently the obvious that shows this is a massive cash grab.

Comments section here: http://hexus.net/gaming/news/pc/108211-star-citizen-alpha-3-teaser-video-shows-moon-landings/

Ah i see, might have to point CAT this way one day...

Thanks for the link :)
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2012
Posts
4,146
Location
Oxfordshire
Chris Roberts himself said after the $19 million funding landmark it would be released in late 2014 - all the fans of this game are excuse making so much they instead moan at the people who point this out??

HE MADE the promises. Not me.

You do realise that when a game was first announced for release in 2014,then 2016 and then 2017 its delayed??

He and his company made those indications - NOT ME.

Maybe he should have been honest and said it would be 2017 or 2018 for a release then? ;)

Its like a cult of personality around this bloke - so what he made a good game decades ago.

He has lied through his teeth in reality - now think if this was not a game,but something else,would people be as forgiving??

Blackberry made good phones ages ago,it has no bearing on whether they are any good TODAY.

You do realise BETA comes after ALPHA,so please tell me exactly in 2017 when this is being released,ESPECIALLY with the informatic early in the thread with the ALPHA not even having half of what they promised??

This is the problem with early access and kickstarter games - the fans don't actually criticise the companies for doing crap like this and its why things like Spacebase DF9 never really got finished and so many other kickstarters have fizzled away.

The fans were excuse making in 2014,then 2015,then 2016 and now its 2017.

All this time they have tried to shut down any criticism of this game,and yet now years later,seriously,are they still at it??

No amount of massaging the facts,changes things - the game has over $150 million funding and everybody I know in real life(not the internet) is laughing at it,ie,its basically vaporware with some bits released to “show” its not “dead yet”. Even if it was released this year it would be years late,and what kind of release?? A game with only a fraction of what was promised I suspect.

Then all the fans will proclaim “its out”,but if anybody points out it does not even have a fraction of what it should have,its all a bit secret,and they will instead have a go at the people pointing it out.

This won't be the first game or last game like this.

None of the fans seem to ask the question why they used Kickstarter and not use more traditional funding methods??

That is because traditional funding methods actually need some degree of release plan,not maybe at some point in the future.

PCMR need to have some standards,because this is certainly not PCMR standards - more like people managing their expectations lower and lower. For what reason,I have zero clue.

I think the objectivity has gone out the window with this years ago.

Anybody with any logic will see a product which was PROMISED in 2014 by the creator,not even out of ALPHA in more or less August 2017,with a fraction of the features actually working.

Yet,at the same time the have accrued massively more funding and are still selling the product in an experimental form nearly THREE years after they promised it would be out.

Now in the real world if a company tried that stunt their investors might think differently.

Yet in kickstarter/early access world they can get away with it since they are selling an unfinished product with a “promise” of it being out at some point,which apparently seems to be not enforceable in any way.

In the end its no point trying to talk about it anymore - if people want to throw their money away on all these projects or live in hope for years,then good for them. Then instead of admitting they might have been conned,or at the very least strung along for years,they shoot the messenger.

I am still waiting for the early access crowd funded car where you get a seat and an engine two years later,with the promise of a full chassis sometime in the near future! :)

This is the funniest post. Bold and capital letter words and stating opinions as facts is always fun to read. Yeah there are some minor points in what is being said but the credibility and similar goes because there is a lot of missing information that unless you follow it then it's not known as you actually have to research to give facts and not repeat what bad journalism state etc.

Ah well, I will be happy to enjoy 3.0 at end of August/Early September when it's out.


Also if anyone hasn't watched the mocap series of videos yet, well worth a watch. Seeing the cast, the details in what is going on and the premise there has really shown why I feel that it is going to be worth the wait.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2012
Posts
4,146
Location
Oxfordshire
oi leave CAT alone!

What is special about CAT? If someone talks rubbish no matter who they are, they will get called out. If someone decides to have a debate about something such as CAT has it would at least be good if they knew the facts of the development and how things have progressed during the 5 year period rather than going on a hate speech although I do think CAT has more issues with Kick Starter and similar in itself than anything else.

Doesn't mean we can't discuss it. Not hating on CAT, just wish that naivety and providing 'facts' that actually are nothing more than opinion or miss information is not good for anyone. I haven't got an account on there or would make a reply to point out some of the mistakes to show the issues in the statement made but I haven't got the energy to do so really.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2012
Posts
4,146
Location
Oxfordshire
Not much to discuss to be honest.

Nope not really. Just really keeping one self entertained reading the comments on such media posts. Fun to watch all the doom and gloom.

Did spend an evening last night watching older videos to see about things such as the SQ42 mocap and similar. It has given me hope that the story will be interesting. Also made me realise how much time they are spending on details which even I think are odd choices such as the fact that eyes dilate based on the light in the area.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,635
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Wait... Hurston? that wasn't meant to be in 3.0.

dsfs.png
 
Back
Top Bottom