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

Is this game suffering from just being too ambitious?

I get they want to flesh it out fully and make it as amazing as they can but they also have to release it at some point too.

This seems to be in some sort of early access for the last decade with no sign of it ever emerging to a 1.0.
 
Last edited:
I watched the sq42 hour long reveal and wasn't overly impressed to be honest, it didn't look bad but I just wasn't blown away. I think moneys been wasted on the Holywood talent, they would have done far better just with professional voice actors. The fps gameplay shown looked so basic and bland, the enemies didn't seem to react to being shot and had a single attack and knockdown animation that was repeated every encounter.
Design wise it also looks very basic b***c sci-fi artistically, there's no flair or soul to the designs.

Its all subjective...

I don't think i have ever watched a prologue to a video game and thought "that was epic" Can you point to anything that's in your subjective opinion better? Genuine question.

It is going to be rough, its not a finished product.
 
Yeah it is very bland and has a distinct lack of soul and flair, it just looks very 'meh' and I feel like I've seen it all before in some way or another.
You've seen it before in Wing Commander, Starlancer, Freelancer and a decade of videos from CIG.

Is this game suffering from just being too ambitious?
Right now it's suffering from constant 30K... Dock - 30K. Undock - 30K. Load cargo - 30K. Enter elevator - 30K. Sell cargo - 30K.
I couldn't manage more than a few minutes without flippin' 30Ks!!
 
Its all subjective...

I don't think i have ever watched a prologue to a video game and thought "that was epic" Can you point to anything that's in your subjective opinion better? Genuine question.

It is going to be rough, its not a finished product.

What do you mean better, as you say its subjective and there are lots of aspects to consider in that question. If I didnt know anything about the project and just watched that prologue I would come away thinking it was kind of cool but nothing I would be super hyped up on. Thats the issue, this is a game thats taken over a decade so far and cost more than any other game ever made so far, I should be coming away from it thinking that looks amazing not oh its a bit bland and that gameplay looks basic and janky. From a technical perspective of the physics and simulation stuff I have no doubt nothing will come close to it but its lacking from a visual design and gameplay perspective based on that prologue. Ill keep an eye out on more content as it wasnt much gameplay shown but only time will tell.

"It is going to be rough, its not a finished product." I was under the impression it was feature complete and just undergoing final polish and bug fixing so the product we saw is what would be delivered from a design and gameplay perspective. Its not any rough edges or technical issues that concerned me.
 
Last edited:
What do you mean better, as you say its subjective and there are lots of aspects to consider in that question. If I didnt know anything about the project and just watched that prologue I would come away thinking it was kind of cool but nothing I would be super hyped up on. Thats the issue, this is a game thats taken over a decade so far and cost more than any other game ever made so far, I should be coming away from it thinking that looks amazing not oh its a bit bland and that gameplay looks basic and janky. From a technical perspective of the physics and simulation stuff I have no doubt nothing will come close to it but its sorely lacking from a visual design and gameplay perspective based on that prologue. Ill keep an eye out on more content as it wasnt much gameplay shown but only time will tell.

"It is going to be rough, its not a finished product." I was under the impression it was feature complete and just undergoing final polish and bug fixing so the product we saw is what would be delivered from a design gameplay perspective. Its not any rough edges or technical issues that concerned me.

Star Citizen / Squadron 42 do top the chart for most expensive game, or plural if you think of the single player campaign as a separate game to the MMO, $732m so far. But i am going to list some other examples to give you an idea of just how much games actually cost to make because i get the sense that too many people think it shouldn't cost more than a fiver.

Star Citizen shares its top slot with Genshin Impact at $751m

Monopoly Go!: $500m
Cyberpunk: $498m
Spiderman 3: $385m
CoD MW 2: $355m

Now i'm going to list the development time of some other games.

Metroid Dread: 16 years
Duke Nukem Forever: 15 years
Mother III: 12 years
Diablo III: 11 years
Prey: 11 years
Final Fantasy XV: 10 years
Team Fortress Two: 9 years
Spore: 8 years

As a bonus.... Starfield, 8 years, $400m

Usually when you get to hear about a game that's coming out in a couple of years that game has already been in development for a number of years.

Star Citizen is unique, the company, CIG did not exist in Q3 2012, they had to create a company, they started in a residential house, the game is financed almost entirely by public crowed funding, there is no $50 Billion publisher financing this, no publisher would even consider this, far too difficult, far too expensive, far too much risk.
So we will, in return for that we get to play the work that they are doing as they do it, this is the only reason we even know it exists, every other game is at this stage very behind closed doors.
Making what you're doing playable as you're doing it creates its own problems, it makes it more expensive and it makes it take longer because you have to get every bit of it somewhat working, normally that comes in one go at the end, not every 3 months.

There is no other way to get something like this done, EA, Bethesda.... they will not do this, to get it done we have to do it ourselves.
 
Last edited:
What do you mean better, as you say its subjective and there are lots of aspects to consider in that question. If I didnt know anything about the project and just watched that prologue I would come away thinking it was kind of cool but nothing I would be super hyped up on. Thats the issue, this is a game thats taken over a decade so far and cost more than any other game ever made so far, I should be coming away from it thinking that looks amazing not oh its a bit bland and that gameplay looks basic and janky. From a technical perspective of the physics and simulation stuff I have no doubt nothing will come close to it but its sorely lacking from a visual design and gameplay perspective based on that prologue. Ill keep an eye out on more content as it wasnt much gameplay shown but only time will tell.

"It is going to be rough, its not a finished product." I was under the impression it was feature complete and just undergoing final polish and bug fixing so the product we saw is what would be delivered from a design gameplay perspective. Its not any rough edges or technical issues that concerned me.
I assume since you are saying that it looks a bit bland I assume. What do you think makes it look bland from other things you have watched/seen for a game, story, etc.

And visual design personally I don't think anything in the sci-fi genre has come out looking as good as this, but that is because I am looking at going this is the classic sci-fi of generations in one all mixed in to give the best of them from Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek and such.

Things like the repetitive knockdown was something that will be sorted over next 2yrs of development they have said as that is part of their final review stage for updates and such. The FPS gameplay at least even in the live PU is actually pretty solid tbh and although the Vanduul looked janky I also expect that will be cleaned up, they looked better in terms of movement in the cutscene sections compared to say the FPS firefight with GA.

It is indeed feature complete so the core engine is complete in terms of features, the game mechanics features are in so for example as you noted knockdowns are in and work so they can flesh them out during the next stage which is part of polish and bug fixing. Animations will get tided up, cutscene transitions cleaned further etc. That generally the next stage they been working on since being feature complete last year with what looks like another 6 months of that till the final polish and such.

I have to say even skeptics that weren't interested in SQ42 and just there for SC when chatting to them are now like wow that actually looks amazing and can't wait to try it out etc. Everyone different though and hey maybe just not for you but it yeah personally I don't think we have had such a solid story driven Sci-Fi game in well decades honestly. There are a lot of issues with CIG and what they done, the gameplay, mechanics and visuals of SQ42 aren't that in my view especially having seen last years and this years videos.
 
Metroid Dread: 16 years
Duke Nukem Forever: 15 years
Mother III: 12 years
Diablo III: 11 years
Prey: 11 years
Final Fantasy XV: 10 years
Team Fortress Two: 9 years
Spore: 8 years
Wow. Correct me if am wrong but all those games are not even MMO games(which tend to be more complex and difficult to make) and some if those even being single player only games...
 
Wow. Correct me if am wrong but all those games are not even MMO games(which tend to be more complex and difficult to make) and some if those even being single player only games...

Starfield, F'ing Starfield, Bethesday when they tried to make a Star Citizen clone, Bethesda! 8 years and $400m, look at it....

No, none of these are MMO's.
 
Last edited:
Starfield, F'ing Starfield, Bethesday when they tried to make a Star Citizen clone, Bethesda! 8 years and $400m, look at it....

No, none of these are MMO's.
Ahh Starfield, a single player game made on existing engine that bathesda already worked on for 20+ years and still took 8 years to ******* make.....

Was hyped about the game but it has less depth than fallout 4....

More loading screens than Fallout 4!!!

Bathesda with about 1000 employess and a engine to work on from Day 1 , took 8 years to build one single player game.

In contrast to CIG who had about 10 people if that on Day 1 of making SC AND SQ42. two games.
 
Ahh Starfield, a single player game made on existing engine that bathesda already worked on for 20+ years and still took 8 years to ******* make.....

Was hyped about the game but it has less depth than fallout 4....

More loading screens than Fallout 4!!!

Bathesda with about 1000 employess and a engine to work on from Day 1 , took 8 years to build one single player game.

In contrast to CIG who had about 10 people if that on Day 1 of making SC AND SQ42. two games.

Same, was looking forward what a big, very experienced, successful and established publisher / developer could do with a similar concept.

I tried to like it, i wanted so much to like it, i finished a session one day and just never booted it up again, yeah....
 
Last edited:
snip

Cyberpunk: $498m

There is no other way to get something like this done, EA, Bethesda.... they will not do this, to get it done we have to do it ourselves.

Cyberpunk took a long time also, CDPR approached mike pondsmith back in 2012 where story boarding and development basically started, the e3 2018 video shown while entirely CGI obviously had many assets that would eventually make it into the game (albeit lower fidelity)

The game released in 2020, but I would say didn't really get fixed until much later and the initial game that was pitched didn't really get delivered until 2022 when phantom liberty released.

Bethesda tried to make their own space game, Starfield, in their own words, it was 25 years in the making. We all know how well that turned out.
 
Just watched this. Did they really spend a year updating the graphics? Are they just trying to find things to do to avoid releasing the game?

Also given I know nothing about that game other than that video, are they supposed to all be androids? There didn't seem to be much emotion and their eyes all appeared "dead". Then I started wondering if that was a plot mechanic to explain being able to respawn if you die, because you're just an android so can just activate another copy or something?
 
Back
Top Bottom