Star Citizen Kotaku UK article

[Geekavenger]

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

 

Did anyone else read through this?  I thought it was well researched and a fascinating look inside the development process.  Nothing particularly new to anyone who is following the dev of this game but I feel like it filled in a lot of the detail surrounding the troubles they have had.  The stuff about iilfonic's assets all being the wrong scale was interesting.

 

Overall I am not particularly worried about the game not getting finished, and this article did nothing to push me in either direction but it was  captivating read.

[colt92]

I generally avoid Kotaku. Either the titles are clickbait or the content is borderline flame in order to spring lengthy comment discussion. I'm not a fan of either. Furthermore, other people from the subforum have told me that most (of not all) of the information in the article is quite old and comes from a disgruntled ex-employee whose NDA was up this year.

[typographie]

23 hours ago, colt92 said:

I generally avoid Kotaku. Either the titles are clickbait or the content is borderline flame in order to spring lengthy comment discussion. I'm not a fan of either. Furthermore, other people from the subforum have told me that most (of not all) of the information in the article is quite old and comes from a disgruntled ex-employee whose NDA was up this year.

I agree that Kotaku (at least Kotaku US) seems to post a lot of "This Season's Trends in Anime Boobs" type articles, but this is not that. If it's a good bit of journalism, it doesn't matter where it was posted.

 

The author is quite clear that his sources include anonymous former employees in the article. By all means you should take the unreliable nature of anonymous sources into account as you read the article, but it does not make it a bad article. You should also take into account the unreliable nature of unaccountable forum posters, since I don't see how they could possibly know anything about these employees' emotional states or NDA status with any certainty.

[Gyre-Taenn]

13 hours ago, typographie said:

If it's a good bit of journalism, it doesn't matter where it was posted.

They've also gone ahead and posted several of their own articles over again in a seemingly sleezeball attempt to gain more clicks. The opposite is true, if the place that the article is posted on does not have integrity, I don't care how good the journalism is. If I don't trust a source, one article isn't going to change my opinion on their opinions.

 

shrug

[Techicolors]

that was a seriously good read. thought the most eye-opener was how much chris pushed the devs 

[elkenrod]

40 minutes ago, Technicolors said:

that was a seriously good read. thought the most eye-opener was how much chris pushed the devs 

 

I thought it was interesting as well.  Although, I found the amount of time/resources wasted on this project so far to be disconcerting.

[Humbug]

there was an old interview with Gabe Newell where he said making half life 1 was much more painful than making half life 2. The reason was that they were building the company (Valve) while trying to build a AAA game. So a lot of things in flux. Lot of things were redone as well. But they took their time and got it sorted in the end.

 

I think a lot of the issues with RSI are traceable to that same fact that they became a very large company very fast so roles, processes and cultures don't always keep up.

 

seeing how much they have achieved so far, and all the technical hurdles that they have overcome, and what they have demoed in gameplay I feel confident that they will deliver the game.

I just hope it will be as fun to play as it is technically impressive, that's my only real worry.

 

 

[Corwin111]

I thought the article was well rounded and surprisingly even-handed. I found it interesting to read and believable, source notwithstanding. In place of the benevolent demi-gods that I have seen CIG and Chris portrayed as by a large portion of the community, this article presents well-intentioned human beings, with their ups and downs, who really feel out of their depth at times - with the scales that their monster has achieved, and yet continue to give their absolute best to see it complete. 

 

I also know at least one person who,  for the longest time, vehemently refused to consider Star Citizen, based on all the hype but finally got sold after reading this article. So that's good in my book.