Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ragnar119]

First watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1Zc2oxijVY&feature=player_embedded

Second go here for more info:
http://www.pcgamer.com/previews/star-citizen-preview-the-open-world-space-sim-of-our-dreams/

Third, support them here:
http://robertsspaceindustries.com/start/ (the site is probably down, as too much people are ramming it at the moment)

In short this is a epic space sim game like freelancer/freespace/wing comander. It has a single player campaign mod, MMO persistent world, private server and mod support.

[Hanzoku]

Interesting.  I question if they can actually deliver a game that can be all things to all people. involved off-line singular player gaming AND online persistent world. Weekly updates BUT not a bugfest. Highly detailed but still playable on systems that aren't on the cutting edge. Support for keyboard / mouse setup AND all the flight control AND some form of 3D support.

Intellectually, I love the idea, but I think this is simply too ambitious to achieve successfully.

[Dariush]

It has a single player campaign mod, MMO persistent world, private server and mod support.

...and then features get gradually stripped away until only a Spore-level pile of shit remains, while the developers swim in money, after they explained in detail why they deserve exactly so much money and not any less (because statistics, man! Magazines!) and conveniently forgetting that other people who are just as qualified ask for far less. That table of salaries was just bullshit. If they want an AAA-level salary, they should get an AAA-level publisher. It's two years from 'release' (meaning it can be safely pushed back another 4+) and they already ask for $10k+ for a ship and some bells and whistles. All the while not offering any guarantee of returning the money if everything falls through beyond their word. Greedy fucks.

[Brons]

Looks great. It'll take 2 more years before they estimate they can release this. I'll just ignore it until it's closer to release.

[Volatar]

It has a single player campaign mod, MMO persistent world, private server and mod support.

...and then features get gradually stripped away until only a Spore-level pile of shit remains, while the developers swim in money, after they explained in detail why they deserve exactly so much money and not any less (because statistics, man! Magazines!) and conveniently forgetting that other people who are just as qualified ask for far less. That table of salaries was just bullshit. If they want an AAA-level salary, they should get an AAA-level publisher. It's two years from 'release' (meaning it can be safely pushed back another 4+) and they already ask for $10k+ for a ship and some bells and whistles. All the while not offering any guarantee of returning the money if everything falls through beyond their word. Greedy fucks.

Can you be any more cynical?

[Drakale]

Well I agree with Dariush on that one. The fact that they aim for single player campaign and MMO at the same time is really really weird. Make one game and do it well, it's hard enough as it is.

[genmac]

Well I agree with Dariush on that one. The fact that they aim for single player campaign and MMO at the same time is really really weird. Make one game and do it well, it's hard enough as it is.

It's not that weird in space game terms, Freelancer for instance.

[ragnar119]

I dont know, they want to do a lot of things. Pretty ambitious, maybe too much, cause 2 to 6 millions is not a lot for this scope of a game. But I generally always like to see more ambitious projects done by some well known people in the industry, than some other generic game. Games like this have a chance to become legends, or to fall horribly, but I think it is always worth a risk to get something like this. If there was no risk, we would probably not see a lot of good games out there.

[Neonivek]

We get enough "Easy money" games that are mediocre but popular that often hook themselves onto a product for popularity but rarely live up to that legacy.

Would it be sooo bad if this game tried to be great then failed?

[Volatar]

Our doubts are traitors, and make us lose the good we oft might win, by fearing to attempt.
-William Shakespeare

Spore was a great vision that was smashed by it's publisher into something that was supposed to have wider appeal. It is not the example you should be using.

[Volatar]

'Would it be sooo bad if this game tried to be great then failed?'
what spore did, is it not?

Spore failed because it's publisher destroyed it's vision. Star Citizen is bypassing publishers.

[Neonivek]

What he is saying is that Spore didn't get to even attempt it because the publisher kept making changes.

Mind you I still think that Spore is a horrible thing to reference for "Yeah games shouldn't try to be great, because they 'could' end up like Spore".

So, what? We want mediocrity because something may NOT be good? Dear goodness...

Never give up on good games... never give up that some day someone will make a great game. Yes it means you are going to be left with less then you would like but it is far greater an outcome then what we currently get... Games that are boring and are meant to be boring because boring sells.

[10ebbor10]

I think he meant that we should not overhype/ be extremely enthousiastic about this game, or other similair promising but complex games, because they might fail, with Spore being an example of that.

[Neonivek]

I think he meant that we should not overhype/ be extremely enthousiastic about this game, or other similair promising but complex games, because they might fail, with Spore being an example of that.

No that is certainly not what he said. Given that he clarified.

We get enough "Easy money" games that are mediocre but popular that often hook themselves onto a product for popularity but rarely live up to that legacy.

Would it be sooo bad if this game tried to be great then failed?

yes. yes it would. it'd be like spore all over again.

He didn't say anything about a game trying to hype itself as great. He clarified and it is about a game trying to be great.

Mind you I blame the Spore community for hyping themselves about Spore... As I said before, they put out enough information before Spore was released that you knew it wasn't going to be anywhere close to the 2005 video.

The problem was that anytime someone went into a Spore forum and went "What is Spore going to be like" they would shill the 2005 video...

[Dunamisdeos]

Please recall these games, set in order of descending dissapointment:



Freelancer - a space sim that did not support joysticks. T_T

Spore - Peter Molyneux. Good game, did not deliver 50% of the promised gameplay.

Fable - Peter Molyneux. Good game. Claimed the ability to plant an acorn and watch it grow into an oak tree as your character progressed.
          Featured no acorns.

Age of Conan : The MMOOPS - An MMORPG that was literally unfinished upon release. Made no effort to finish the game or even solve a single bug until the entire team was fired and a new one replaced it. DOUBLE BILLED ITS PLAYERBASE AND OFFERED NO REFUND.



I will gladly support this game as it gets closer to the two year mark. I will throw 100$ if this game looks to be what it claims to as it releases. But I have watched the PC gaming industry turn more and more into a great, vast, snake oil market over the past decade. Keep in mind, people, that there is ABOSOLUTELY NO LEGAL PENALTY for selling a game that was sold based solely on barefaced lies. After all, you signed the EULA.

Furthermore, having read their mission statement paragraph at the bottom of the support page, I agree wholeheartedly with everything they say. I am dead tired of army game sequels. I am DEAD TIRED of JRPG games that offer nothing new since 2000. I am not supporting another game that tries to sell itself to me based on its successful predecessor. I want more Bioshock, a game that broke the mold in storytelling. I want more Final Fantasy VII, which broke the mold in graphics of it's era, yet didn't sacrifice expected gameplay. I want Assassin's Creed, that broke the mold in gameplay without sacrificing storyteling.  I want games to be fun and unexpected again, not just an attempt by publishers to glean more money out of yesteryear's titles. THIS SAID, what these guys say lines up SO EXACTLY with what myself and other old-school gamers are saying nowadays, that I'm wary someone has been listening to our conversations, if you know what I mean.
 
Or maybe I'm just that jaded by "Call for Battlefield Soldiers 9 - World War Ops 4 : Black Guns of Secrecy". The sequel. 2.