precision posted:

There's literally never been a better time to buy an Idris!!!

chill commando posted:

You can’t do too much about others. But what you can do is to work on yourself. Don’t get caught in discussion with those people or give them any kind of attention like with this post. Just stick to your own advice: hit the door and chill with the positive people here see you in the verse!

paranoid commando posted:

It's IAE, the slime bubbles out of the pit like clockwork. Some of it is organic criticism from people who're having their attention drawn to SC for the first time possibly ever, or at least since the previous year, but some of it is definitely poo poo-stirring by The Usual Suspects because it's not enough to not like it, they have to try and hurt the project and that's what counts as an entertaining and meaningful use of their time.

Popete posted:

5 is nothing. Some of these ships supposedly need 50+ players to operate.

Dwesa posted:

from the main sub

Star Systems Backlog

Virtual Captain posted:

Ah yes the Kraken

Totally a real thing CIG is working hard to bring to the 'verse.


lol did they really scam ppl for this jpeg four years ago?

4th Stimpire Queen posted:

And no modules if you pay 5000$ for the complete' RSI pack, cause gently caress you whales too!

4th Stimpire Queen posted:

So yeah, the base Galaxy package has no modules whatsoever unless you splurge for a module pack or the complete" edition.

What's inside the ship if you get it with no modules? No one knows, a space as empty as CIG's roadmaps probably.

Spectrum didn't take it well:



Also no LTI if you buy single modules, you peasant!



And no modules if you pay 5000$ for the complete' RSI pack, cause gently caress you whales too!



But no matter what, this one is selling like hotcakes, it's not like being milked ever stopped whales.

Unpopular opinion: Backlog is unavoidable... posted:

Let's be honest, if people knew how to put the shoe on the other foot or be sympathetic to others, then there is a clear reason that things are the way that they are as far as the backlog and CIG releasing new concept ships.

1. CIG has to sell ships, as it is currently the main income of the game (please don't debate this, I know what CR said in the past)
   
2. Half of the community complained that ships were released without gameplay, and CIG listened and stopped releasing ships without gameplay.
   
3. The other half wants all ships out now, which is in direct conflict with #2.
   
4. Then there are the flame fanners who try to benefit from the negativity by fanning said flames (I won't list any names)

So, either we let CIG focus on gameplay (which they are, PES, Server Meshing, all coming in the next year or two), or continue to complain about this or that, ad nauseum.

Can we also look at what has made it into the game to date, the ships that were complained about last year (or the year before) that are now in the game (and gameplay for that matter?)... or the fact that CIG is about to release the final pieces of the foundational puzzle to open up the gameplay all of us have been asking for? Can we do that or is that too much positivity?

This community needs to take a step back and look at the history of this project from a more wholistic perspective. The challenges, complaints and concerns CIG has addressed are a lot and apparently easily forgotten. Let's not have short selective memory, just picking specific things out of history that fit our desires. Do the work of looking at the big picture, before kneejerk reacting.

Either we want them to focus on gameplay or we want them to focus on ships... as a community, maybe its time to make up our mind?

When are we satisfied, content or understanding? is it ever? You can be those things while holding them accountable

I am not saying don't complain about things that matter to you, but can we put more effort into properly digesting the information that is already out there on these subjects prior to rage fueled inconsistent ranting?

Can we elevate our self-control and manage our expectations better or is that outside of our capabilities?
Asking for a friend :face_with_rolling_eyes:

Either way, happy IAE and hopefully 3.18 by the end of the year

Not sure why everyone is upset with the backlog... posted:

I'm not sure why everyone is upset with the backlog. I understand the logic/arguments, but I would propose that if you have the cash to buy the Galaxy, you've probably had the cash in the past to buy other large SC purchases. Why not just recycle the funds?
I melted my Perseus today. Realistically I won't see the drat thing until 5-8 years after purchase, so why keep it in my hanger? I took that cash and bought the Galaxy...and I'll probably melt that too, and keep doing this.

Ultimately CIG will continue to pump out ships that will trump what I've already purchased, both in form and function. They’ll do this before even delivering my initial purchase. For me, it's sort of like a bank account.

For me, it allows me to have the newest shiny object. For CIG, it allows them to give me a ship without a sell. It's a beautiful win/lose situation. Furthermore, I lock in the cheapest price. Like "ship futures".

Will I get LTI? No, probably not, but lets get real. I have LTI on my Perseus, but at the rate we're going I'll be nearly 60 before I can dream of flying it (bought at age 47). 120 months of insurance just might outlast me (hopefully not), but by the time 10 years catches up to my CIG account, there would have been a completely different ship with overlapping capabilities and better looks that I can melt it for...and get another 10 years...or 2 years...or whatever. Ultimately I'll never keep a ship long enough to find out.

Their business model has ensured that once I've reached a certain monetary threshold (for me that's a little over $5k), I have plenty of store credit capitol to rotate and purchase really anything in their store. There's a few exceptions. I'll keep my Idris and K package, but even that is questionable., I don't even know if I'll be in the mood to manage an org. by the time they release this ship.

When we speak about backlog in terms of decades, we need to take a step back and realize how our lives will change and what this means. Very few of us will make it a decade without major life changes in health, wealth, or circumstance. Today I have the means to purchase $1k ships anytime...tomorrow The Great Reset redistributes my wealth and I'm on the street.

Who should really be concerned? CIG. If everyone decided to do what I'm doing on the next concept, the business model would change. CIG would lose the motivation to crank our a concept. Will the company go bankrupt? I don't know, that's not my concern and I've invested $5k in cash I don't care if I ever see again. CIG can worry about that.

I would say I've supported this game in more ways than any other game. I love the game for what it is today. I've accepted that I may not get to see my Idris, and I'm okay with this, but that doesn't mean I have to spend anymore money. Beyond that, it's a drat game, so why be upset with their business choices? We have choices too.

EDIT: Just waiting for the "angry tweets" to roll in. Truth is, I'm hoping to remind those who are sour of the silver lining/loop hole that allows you to have your cake and eat it too.

posted:

I'll be nearly 60 before I can dream of flying it (bought at age 47)

4th Stimpire Queen posted:

quote:

One of the things not really appreciated by many is the general approach CI are taking to development. Most games are 'One Trick Ponies', they may come up with a great idea or even two but they will limit it's scope. One of the reasons Call of Duty became so popular in the fairly well populated genre of war simulation games was that it had variety in the multiplayer and single player modules. It had the 'Jump in for 5 minutes fun and challenge yourself' ethos. I played MW3 for many hours, it was a real sense of achievement to beat the official dev team time in the snow sled race module.

CI realise this and capitalise on it. They don't kick the can a little down the road and then stop like most developers do, they expand on a feature or capability to capitalise on all it's aspects. They are making a game to be played and expanded upon for decades. This is something dev team members at CI have told me in person when I've met them. I haven't met, let alone chatted to, any developer from any other game I've ever played.

We have the modules which can be expanded, they can be ported to other other platforms in the future and there is a single-player narrative game that actually feeds into the multiplayer rather than being permanently remote and standalone. In terms of bang for buck there very little wastage. The same assets and technology used in potentially 3 separate marketable products. Capital ships may seem useless in small enclosed Arena Commander maps right now but two things are going to happen - AC map sizes will increase, and players will realise they have a plethora of mobile FPS bases they can spawn in as they like for things like capture the flag. In a sandbox Arena Commander module map the players can make whatever type of game experience they like short of the massive open world exploration. I've made levels in games where they have included the level design tools - Far Cry and Trials HD for example. If we get (as promised) tools to make our own levels in AC modules and those tools are marketed rather than included as a package with the game anyway that is something I know I would be very pleased to spend hundreds of hours doing.

The gaming industry generally hides the fact that many game concepts get completely dropped and features in the games they do produce also get dropped or substantially trimmed down. CI being so open about planned features means they are committed in ways standard development companies aren't... they have to make features work once they've announced them no matter how long it takes to do the R&D. I don't know of any game project design at this scope that does that. It's like having your personal Michael Angelo commissioned to make whatever the hell you want if it is remotely technically feasible eventually.

I don't know of any game development studio that has such feedback into a live game project from it's player base. This is something the development team at CI comment on all the time, they are industry veterans and they have never experienced anything like the level of interaction with the gamers who actually play their output. Even the newest in the community can name, and fit known game features to a a face in the team - how many Activision or Bethesda dev team members can say that about the people who play their games?

"We have to focus, I mean our first and foremost focus is delivering what the fans or the backers have asked for" - Brian Chambers 2016
Considering that most games of this scope are developed in total secrecy this is a very unusual concept. You might scoff and say they haven't achieved it yet, but for senior development team members of a company to even say it, and have it be a development goal, is unheard of.

...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoXQ4dmnRrk

Sardonik posted:

I adamantly refuse to believe there are that many suckers still pulling the trigger on this stuff.

If there legitimately are, well, the remnants of CIG better pony up for some security when things finally and inevitably collapse.

Mirificus posted:

4th Stimpire Queen posted:

Pixelate posted:

Some scraps of activity on the companies house page

Before any director could call a meeting whenever. Now they're just going to meet semi-annually.

Maybe Chris kept calling in the night with his latest idea?

4th Stimpire Queen posted:

So many concerned citizens, thankfully it's not the paying ones

4th Stimpire Queen posted:

I’m sorry, who is this “Michael Angelo”?

Beefeater1980 posted:

Any director can still call a meeting at any time. They appear to have just added a requirement to meet twice each year.

Beefeater1980 posted:

E: I had a look at the game recently for the first time in several years. It wasn’t unplayably awful, just very janky and buggy. I thought the in-game expo was quite neat, although it seems weird to me to release a new high profile ship now and not have it show up at the expo. I did try renting one of the big ships, from Crusader Industries. I made it as far as the pilot’s seat; when I stood up it dumped me out through the front windshield.

4th Stimpire Queen posted:

I’m sorry, who is this “Michael Angelo”?

quote:

To be fair, this isn't his fulltime occupation, he spends a lot more time on Reddit, Pipeline Discord and the Elite Dangerous forums. He only pops over here for the odd 'controversy'.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/star-citizen-discussion-thread-v12.548510/post-10006825

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0dpHFJ4VCE

https://massivelyop.com/2022/10/26/...bow-paint-jobs/

Which of course he isn't averse to getting started in the first place. He never wants to miss out on an SC event to drum up some drama!

Hey Stuart.. I've been busy, what do I have to do to get my posts screenshotted over at FD and the Pipeline Discord again?

How am I doing?

[edit] Isn't GrimHex an asteroid base btw?

quote:

Whoa, I've got a stalker, awesome! :laughing:
Thanks for further promoting the cause for funky rainbow-like paintjobs in Star Citizen :rainbow:

quote:

what do I have to do to get my posts screenshotted over at FD and the Pipeline Discord again?

No idea, I only visit Pipeline Discord for the leaks, and I don't think Frontier Developments know who you are.

quote:

Oh they do, they just don't know it. :wink:

quote:

That sounds creepy, yikes