"Troubled" development of Star Citizen?

[KCmetro]

Okay, so is there a TLDR version of this...

http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/09/23/inside-the-troubled-development-of-star-citizen

...it's an insanely long-winded page.

 

There isn't one on the page, but there's the end of the writeup:

 

Quote

 

“Will it be fun to play? Not sure. Will it be an amazing tech and beautiful art demo? Absolutely.”

Another thing was clear from conversations with Star Citizen’s current staff, people who have either survived these tumultuous years or were not there to experience them: they still believe that Star Citizen is possible, and they are working hard on it. But no game can be made on belief alone. As of right now, there is no Star Citizen. There are several different live demos, but they are just that: demos. There is no game.

Star Citizen is the biggest crowdfunding success in history. The story of its development so far, rocky as it has been, is fascinating – and, as we’ve discovered, much more complex than it looks from outside. But sooner or later, Roberts and his team have to deliver a game, or all of this will be just a prelude to the most expensive failed development of all time.

 

 

The question is, when will "sooner or later" be?

 

 

[Praesi]

Nothing new here

[KCmetro]

New to me. I just discovered Star Citizen.

[abyss03]

This is dated September, if its the post from last time I think it was an ex member of staff who was angry because he was let go or something? maybe not but these things seem to crop up every now and again, i'm not worried about it personally.

[Techicolors]

A very wide backing community and development team suggest that a lot of people want this game to come into fruition, including me. No doubt that this is the most ambitious game in a very long time, so obviously it'll have a troubled development and utmost reliance on crowd-funding. But if you followed the game pretty regularly you would see that it isn't a total cash grab. Sometimes the progress looks a little bit inconsistent, but you'll just have to roll with it. 

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, Technicolors said:

A very wide backing community and development team suggest that a lot of people want this game to come into fruition, including me. No doubt that this is the most ambitious game in a very long time, so obviously it'll have a troubled development and utmost reliance on crowd-funding. But if you followed the game pretty regularly you would see that it isn't a total cash grab. Sometimes the progress looks a little bit inconsistent, but you'll just have to roll with it. 

I imagine with how "open" they're being about development is how major studios look if they were to show off their actual work and not some quickly put together scripted events to show off at E3.

[Techicolors]

Honestly there's going to people who will criticize the game for its development model, that it'll fail because it's too ambitious, or some other reason i cannot care to think of. The thing about the game failing is why even consider it? I'm gonna be biased here because I am a backer (though not during its Kickstarter days), but you do have to believe that the amount of work put in to making this huge game will come together in one $60 title, sometime in the future. Heck, let's not think about when it'll finish, but how it'll finish.

[KCmetro]

Or both, when and how.

 

[rentaspoon]

19 hours ago, Kloaked said:

I imagine with how "open" they're being about development is how major studios look if they were to show off their actual work and not some quickly put together scripted events to show off at E3.

They have a fortnightly show where they go through any bugs they have, a weekly show which shows of some currently relatable tech and gives an update plus one where people can ask devs questions, a monthly town hall show for some of the top devs like Chris Roberts and Tony what's his face as well as monthly reports and few technical documents and have now released the internal schedule, squadron 42 was ment to be shown at citizencon but not polished and there current work can be seen by playing star citizen or just search YouTube.

 

Please tell me how they could be more "open" they could be?

[Guest Kloaked]

1 hour ago, rentaspoon said:

Please tell me how they could be more "open" they could be?

You misunderstood me. I'm saying if these AAA studios were as open as CI was about development, I'd wager they would look about the same. Nobody gets to really see how things work at these AAA studios at all aside from those flashy developer videos that come out toward release.

[KCmetro]

9 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

You misunderstood me. I'm saying if these AAA studios were as open as CI was about development, I'd wager they would look about the same. Nobody gets to really see how things work at these AAA studios at all aside from those flashy developer videos that come out toward release.

I'm sure there's a wide array of ways things are run from one AAA studio to the next, from great to mediocre to horrible. I would be curious to see how they compare from one studio to the next, the behind-the-scenes stuff nobody gets to see.

[rentaspoon]

2 hours ago, KCmetro said:

I'm sure there's a wide array of ways things are run from one AAA studio to the next, from great to mediocre to horrible. I would be curious to see how they compare from one studio to the next, the behind-the-scenes stuff nobody gets to see.

Clearly I did, personally if other companies where as open as CIG I would feel like they would have more support from players

[2FA]

Well considering that they had to develop their own tools and pretty much rewrite an entire engine, I think development is going quite swimmingly.

[Xaring]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/schedule-report

The game is moving on. THey are working on it. We WILL have a game, The first chapter of Squadron 42 is expected for early/spring 2017, and that will already have 20 hours (aprox) of story driven gameplay.

No other game i know of has ever publiched the inside schedule to date. 

[KCmetro]

The only gameplay right now is, what, arena commander? There's the hangar but that's not really gameplay, it's just walking around and looking at things in a big space, putting down a ship, looking around at it or inside it, then going back to arena commander.

 

It sounds like star marine will be released soon, and going to one or some planets will still be a while, with access to more a ways down the road.

 

Without concrete - that is, without unchanging - release dates, it can make people either worry about the potential for future success or they could simply get tired of waiting and give up.

 

Having tentative release dates could help keep a hold of some of the worriers and tired-of-waiting people. Although it doesn't help when they end up getting pushed back, again, and again.

 

There are probably already people out there that have given up and will continue to do so. Impatient people.

 

Continued marketing efforts could bring people in but only up to a point. Releasing the new versions is basically all that can be done before an official go-live release of the completed game.

 

There's the point of waiting so it can be complete, rather if there was not a wait and the official release ending up being incomplete. The game will technically always be incomplete, no matter how long the wait. That's not just because of the addition of new content. Even when it is officially released, it will continue to experience bugs.

 

All of this has been said many times by many people in discussions about Star Citizen. The game itself has become more of an item of discussion than an item of gaming. With the hype, it will end up flying high or crashing, with the former being what we all hope for, and the latter resulting in stragglers doing their thing.

 

It needs to be released. It doesn't take much for the ongoing joke of it being released "soon" to quickly turn into a bad taste for some would-be fans of the game every time the title is mentioned.

 

Currently, 2.5 is out, it looks like 2.6 (with star marine) will be out by 12/16 or otherwise by the end of 2016; and people are saying 3.0 (explore planet(s)) will be out in 3-6 months, while others say 6-12 months, but basically any time from early to late 2017; then there's the series of 3.X releases, who knows when those will happen; then the big 4.0, which might have access to worlds and star systems. By the time these major milestones in the game will have been completed, the technology might be outdated.

 

It's all happening. The good and bad of it. It's a painful wait for those who care about it. It has plenty of financial support, with the millions of dollars that have been contributed so far, and a lot will continue to be contributed. The questions of when and how good it will be is in question.

 

If the rate of progress of small-scale completions of the game does not increase, or at least the rate of progress of new releases, even minor revisions, fixes, and additions, then the company will lose out on the opportunity to reach optimal level of support to continue to push the game forward to reach its ultimate goals.

 

It would likely still live on, but could end up becoming dated and mediocre, while the gaming community moves their primary focus on to other games, spending less time and less money on Star Citizen.

 

Let's hope that doesn't happen, it's an amazing concept. The V2 video is a dream come true for this type of gaming. It looks like that might be what will be included in 3.0, and if that's truly going to be released before the end of 2017, then the company will likely continue to gain and maintain a very strong following.

 

It's the carrot and the stick, or very close to it, all pending the end result of the game, which we will not know until it has either been officially released or has died off.

[Gyre-Taenn]

43 minutes ago, KCmetro said:

All of this has been said many times by many people in discussions about Star Citizen.

I'm really struggling to understand what your point is. You continually make jabs at Star Citizen and CIG, while also also making concessions.

 

You're either preaching to the choir or... you're preaching to the choir. There is not an original statement in all that and it does not further any discussion or conversation.

[KCmetro]

6 minutes ago, Gyre-Taenn said:

I'm really struggling to understand what your point is.

You don't have to take personal offense to it (I'm not making jabs). I support the game and the studio. I'm reflecting on observations of a collection of discussions from others, they have left their impressions, although I am new to the scene and optimistic about it, while also being realistic. You don't need to discuss this further. If that's what you wish, then move along. I will remain hopeful that SC will end up being a huge success.

 

[Gyre-Taenn]

10 minutes ago, KCmetro said:

You don't have to take personal offense to it (I'm not making jabs). I support the game and the studio. I'm reflecting on observations of a collection of discussions from others, they have left their impressions, although I am new to the scene and optimistic about it, while also being realistic. You don't need to discuss this further. If that's what you wish, then move along. I will remain hopeful that SC will end up being a huge success.

 

Through your qualifying, I'm even more confused as to why you're posting a thread that might discourage others or give bad impressions of the game. What is the point of this entire thread? And I'm not personally offended because you haven't offended me.

[KCmetro]

1 minute ago, Gyre-Taenn said:

Through your qualifying, I'm even more confused as to why you're posting a thread that might discourage others or give bad impressions of the game. What is the point of this entire thread? And I'm not personally offended because you haven't offended me.

I'm sorry, but I won't paraphrase what I wrote to clear you of your confusion. I will say this, again: I'm reflecting on discussions from others; I am optimistic, while also being realistic; I will remain hopeful that SC will end up being a huge success. I suggest that you move on, ignore this thread or even ignore me if you wish.

[rentaspoon]

On 11/12/2016 at 7:04 PM, KCmetro said:

I'm sorry, but I won't paraphrase what I wrote to clear you of your confusion. I will say this, again: I'm reflecting on discussions from others; I am optimistic, while also being realistic; I will remain hopeful that SC will end up being a huge success. I suggest that you move on, ignore this thread or even ignore me if you wish.

@Gyre-Taenn to ignore it because he doesn't understand? I'm with him your points are confusing but I'll try to go through them.

On 11/12/2016 at 5:47 PM, KCmetro said:

1)The only gameplay right now is, what, arena commander? There's the hangar but that's not really gameplay, it's just walking around and looking at things in a big space, putting down a ship, looking around at it or inside it, then going back to arena commander.

 

2) It sounds like star marine will be released soon, and going to one or some planets will still be a while, with access to more a ways down the road.

 

3) Without concrete - that is, without unchanging - release dates, it can make people either worry about the potential for future success or they could simply get tired of waiting and give up.

 

Having tentative release dates could help keep a hold of some of the worriers and tired-of-waiting people. Although it doesn't help when they end up getting pushed back, again, and again.

 

There are probably already people out there that have given up and will continue to do so. Impatient people.

 

Continued marketing efforts could bring people in but only up to a point. Releasing the new versions is basically all that can be done before an official go-live release of the completed game.

 

There's the point of waiting so it can be complete, rather if there was not a wait and the official release ending up being incomplete. The game will technically always be incomplete, no matter how long the wait. That's not just because of the addition of new content. Even when it is officially released, (4) it will continue to experience bugs.

 

All of this has been said many times by many people in discussions about Star Citizen. The game itself has become more of an item of discussion than an item of gaming. With the hype, it will end up flying high or crashing, with the former being what we all hope for, and the latter resulting in stragglers doing their thing.

 

It needs to be released. It doesn't take much for the ongoing joke of it being released "soon" to quickly turn into a bad taste for some would-be fans of the game every time the title is mentioned.

 

(5) Currently, 2.5 is out, it looks like 2.6 (with star marine) will be out by 12/16 or otherwise by the end of 2016; and people are saying 3.0 (explore planet(s)) will be out in 3-6 months, while others say 6-12 months, but basically any time from early to late 2017; then there's the series of 3.X releases, who knows when those will happen; then the big 4.0, which might have access to worlds and star systems. By the time these major milestones in the game will have been completed, the technology might be outdated.

 

(6)It's all happening. The good and bad of it. It's a painful wait for those who care about it. It has plenty of financial support, with the millions of dollars that have been contributed so far, and a lot will continue to be contributed. The questions of when and how good it will be is in question.

 

If the rate of progress of small-scale completions of the game does not increase, or at least the rate of progress of new releases, even minor revisions, fixes, and additions, then the company will lose out on the opportunity to reach optimal level of support to continue to push the game forward to reach its ultimate goals.

 

It would likely still live on, but could end up becoming dated and mediocre, while the gaming community moves their primary focus on to other games, spending less time and less money on Star Citizen.

 

Let's hope that doesn't happen, it's an amazing concept. The V2 video is a dream come true for this type of gaming. It looks like that might be what will be included in 3.0, and if that's truly going to be released before the end of 2017, then the company will likely continue to gain and maintain a very strong following.

 

It's the carrot and the stick, or very close to it, all pending the end result of the game, which we will not know until it has either been officially released or has died off.

(1) Gameplay is arena commander and the mini-pu which consists of some ICC missions, security mission, detective type mission and a keep the arrays off/on depending on if you are a pirate/not, SC is going for quality over quantity but with about 500hrs in game I'd say never leave without your friends. (2) 3.0 should be Jan/Feb yes

(3) they have tried this and failed, people are impatient and they tried refusing dates. which is why they release internal target dates, which seems the best compromise

(4) bugs do not mean the game is incomplete and unfinished.

(5) who cares if the tech is outdated? it's probably best as it means more people that play mmos can join due to lower spec PCS.

(6)It's not painful for us to wait, most of us are enjoying the journey still, it's got me into 3d modelling and I've learnt a thing or two about game dev along the way, watching devs respond to the community and make changes as the community suggests something is awesome.

 

You basicly mumble about previous points on the rest so I'm gonna skip that.

 

Chris is attempting a game that will be around for 10-20 years so yes it'll take time but you look at the 2012 video to today's an tell me you expect the tech to be outdated. he'll even the new models for 2.6 would have had 4k nether regions (I believe they have probably barbie'd them now)

[KCmetro]

It's funny that you go through the trouble to analyze and dissect what I said. I'm not even going to bother reading it. It's not that big of a deal. The pre-release version of the game is great, I'm sure that it'll be great when it is officially released. I will say this, again: I'm reflecting on discussions from others; I am optimistic, while also being realistic; I will remain hopeful that SC will end up being a huge success. I suggest that you move on, ignore this thread or even ignore me if you wish.

[rentaspoon]

15 hours ago, KCmetro said:

It's funny that you go through the trouble to analyze and dissect what I said. I'm not even going to bother reading it. It's not that big of a deal. The pre-release version of the game is great, I'm sure that it'll be great when it is officially released. I will say this, again: I'm reflecting on discussions from others; I am optimistic, while also being realistic; I will remain hopeful that SC will end up being a huge success. I suggest that you move on, ignore this thread or even ignore me if you wish.

Next time put at the start 3 words: So in reflection

 

Oh and no trouble, I come on this forum to converse with people, it's certainly been.. entertaining with you