Star Citizen Single-Player Delayed Indefinitely

[rattacko123]

3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

I'll go further and say not more than 1 or 2 modules that will be half baked will ever be released.

They have released 1 full module and 1 half baked module already xd, so ur argument is invalid

[Misanthrope]

Just now, rattacko123 said:

They have released 1 full module and 1 half baked module already xd, so ur argument is invalid

Nothing else will ever come out.

[Misanthrope]

5 hours ago, Terodius said:

I was one of the original campaign backers-I put in 250 dollars for the Constellation package. Although my hype has gone down over the years, I still believe when the game comes out it'll be amazing.

This, and most people defending this, is a text book case of cognitive dissonance, due to the bold part.

[RagnarokDel]

13 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/237434-star-citizen-single-player-delayed-indefinitely

 

Cloud Imperium Games, makers of the sprawling, controversial, and long-delayed space simulator/FPS shooter/single-player space combat title known as Star Citizen, announced the game’s single-player campaign, Squadron 42, will be delayed indefinitely. The reason is simple: With so much left undone, there are huge chunks of the single-player campaign yet unfinished. CIG had originally promised Squadron 42 would ship in 2016, but it’s now clear there’s no way that could happen. The fact that the company has yet to announce a new shipping date isn’t particularly promising, either.

 

 

I and many others have been warning you from the beginning. This is a Ponzi Scheme. Stop giving away your money on a project they do not have any intention of finishing! They are taking it in while not increasing staff. It's OBVIOUS!

I'd rather have a finished game then No Man's Sky 2.

[Helly]

1 hour ago, rattacko123 said:

They have released 1 full module and 1 half baked module already xd, so ur argument is invalid

actually the hanger module was the first which was a full module.... the Arena commander was the second which was a full module and did exactly what it was suppose to do. Thats the 2 modules @Misanthrope said would be the max that would be released... But there's already the PU which is playable and being expanded. The Star Marine module is coming soon. So he's so wrong that its obvious he has no idea what he's even talking about.

 

I can't wait for you all to see that you're wrong. It would have been a scam if they hadn't done anything and shown anything by now. But they are giving updates and show everyone exactly what they're working on and whats happening with the game EVERY WEEK. If this is a scam then im happy to have fallen for the most awesome and exciting scam ever....

[ADM-Ntek]

 

 

[Ryujin2003]

Maybe they are following the Ubisoft development model?

[Prysin]

1 hour ago, Ryujin2003 said:

Maybe they are following the Ubisoft development model?

which of them?

The one that releases a massively buggy game and nothing gets patched?
The one that releases a well balanced game, with support and good DLCs?
The one that releases with glitches, and DLCs to fix the glitches?

[Misanthrope]

2 hours ago, Helly said:

I can't wait for you all to see that you're wrong.

Difference is that if I'm wrong, I'll get to play a game that might be anywhere between pretty decent and amazing. Maybe a few people would boast a bit on a forum, nothing I can't ignore easily.

 

If you're wrong however, you're out of cash. See why it's important not to waste your money on kickstart? Yeah the game wouldn't have been possible without kickstarter, whatever the game shouldn't have been made without proper financing and if he couldn't get that (and I maintain that's bullshit) then it shouldn't fucking exist, period.

[goodtofufriday]

I wasnt a backer, and after reading all the opinions I wish I was. Mass effect 3 started development in late 2007 and released early 2012, and its a smaller scope of a game compared to this SC. So I reasonably dont see the issue here when a studio with an already done up engine took that long to polish their game. While these guys have built parts of the engine from the ground up.  

[Ryujin2003]

17 minutes ago, Prysin said:

which of them?

The one that releases a massively buggy game and nothing gets patched?
The one that releases a well balanced game, with support and good DLCs?
The one that releases with glitches, and DLCs to fix the glitches?

The Rainbow Six Patriot model.

[suicidalfranco]

wish i had backed the game back then 

[dalekphalm]

9 hours ago, Prysin said:

no, it was Chris Roberts himself, private lawsuits. He does own rights to the game, despite MS being the publisher.

MS was purely a publisher, not the developer. Anyone who claims diffrently should look into the matter a lot more carefully.

Chris was on the dev team almost the whole way, despite what people have claimed (to make him seem innocent because he started getting A LOT of negative rep for it during the kickstarter campaign and hype train for Star Citizen)

Could you please post some sources on this? Because [citation needed]

 

All sources I've seen follow the same narrative:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freelancer_(video_game)#Development

Chris Roberts founded Digital Anvil (The company that made Freelancer) in 1996. He had this idea for Freelancer, but the more he fleshed the idea out, the more that he knew he needed money. A LOT of money. More money then they had access to. So he knew there were only a handful of companies that could give him the amount he needed.

 

Enter Microsoft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Anvil#Microsoft

On December 5th, 2000, Microsoft bought Digital Anvil.

 

So no. They weren't just the Publishers. They OWNED the development company. That meant they had full control over the creative process.

 

Chris Roberts LEFT Digital Anvil after the Microsoft takeover. He later returned as a creative consultant. But guess what? A creative consultant has no control over the process. Microsoft instructed the dev team to scale it down and focus on specific things.

 

So if you're saying that Chris Roberts was more highly involved, and that Microsoft had nothing to do with it besides being the bank, and had nothing to do with the DMCA takedown requests for mods, please prove me wrong with sources.

[Prysin]

53 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Could you please post some sources on this? Because [citation needed]

 

All sources I've seen follow the same narrative:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freelancer_(video_game)#Development

Chris Roberts founded Digital Anvil (The company that made Freelancer) in 1996. He had this idea for Freelancer, but the more he fleshed the idea out, the more that he knew he needed money. A LOT of money. More money then they had access to. So he knew there were only a handful of companies that could give him the amount he needed.

 

Enter Microsoft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Anvil#Microsoft

On December 5th, 2000, Microsoft bought Digital Anvil.

 

So no. They weren't just the Publishers. They OWNED the development company. That meant they had full control over the creative process.

 

Chris Roberts LEFT Digital Anvil after the Microsoft takeover. He later returned as a creative consultant. But guess what? A creative consultant has no control over the process. Microsoft instructed the dev team to scale it down and focus on specific things.

 

So if you're saying that Chris Roberts was more highly involved, and that Microsoft had nothing to do with it besides being the bank, and had nothing to do with the DMCA takedown requests for mods, please prove me wrong with sources.

well i'd be lucky to find counter-proof of what? 8 year old DMCAs from sites that went poof 5-8 years ago. Hell, i dont even think google archive will have anything on that

 

 

EDIT: All i know is that the lawyer firm involved in two of the incidents represented Mr Chris Roberts.

[Carclis]

6 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Nothing else will ever come out.

What makes you come to that conclusion? Have you even watched the latest footage from Citizencon or even remotely paid any attention to their content updates?

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, Carclis said:

What makes you come to that conclusion?

The OP and several other news items pointing at how they're hemorrhaging cash with nothing to show for (Yes they have something, but in the grand scheme of things nothing) They're a quagmire already, another Duke Nukem Forever.

[rucdoc]

Did you guys watch the citizen convetion demo?

 

here's the demo of the dev tools:

 

 

 

and here's the gameplay demo:

 

 

watch those and tell me this isn't a thing

 

[Carclis]

11 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

The OP and several other news items pointing at how they're hemorrhaging cash with nothing to show for (Yes they have something, but in the grand scheme of things nothing) They're a quagmire already, another Duke Nukem Forever.

For reference, Chris Robert's words were "It’s really important to do it right. ... As much as we wanted to have Squadron 42 for this year, it is not going to be this year because, for all the polish we need to do, it still needs more time".

 

If you missed Citizencon here is the footage with the first half hour being completely new and unseen footage (could be more but I haven't had time to watch it all). There is also the Star Marine portion of the game which was demoed quite some time ago and is supposed to be released with the next patch and much improved mechanics and head stabilisation.

 

I backed in 2014 and progress is definitely slower than I had hoped, but from the footage and content being showed now the process appears to be speeding up a fair bit.

[Juanitology]

3 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

If you're wrong however, you're out of cash. See why it's important not to waste your money on kickstart

250 dollars is a very negligible amount of money for me, and I've been very happy with every single kickstarter/indiegogo project I've ever backed (13 and counting). When you participate in that system you assume some risk, but if you ask me it's worth it. There's a lot of great people with great ideas who lack the means to bring them to fruition, and even though there have been some black sheep, the platform as a whole has been very successful at making those ideas possible.

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, Terodius said:

250 dollars is a very negligible amount of money for me

Good that you can afford to make mistakes. Doesn't makes it any more morally justifiable for Roberts to abuse the general public with a scam (Yes I maintain all crowd funding projects are scams, yes even the LMG one)

[Cela1]

Where the f*ck did "Delayed indefinitely" come from!? They never said anything like that, they just said it needed more time. I hate it when news sites try to kick up a fuss about a load of BS that they just made up, especially guessing they have never tried to code a single word first hand in life.

 

/rant

[Juanitology]

25 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Yes I maintain all crowd funding projects are scams, yes even the LMG one

You might want to go in for a check at your nearest psychiatrist lol. I got a bunch of cool products that I'm happy with at highly discounted prices through crowdfunded projects. Don't see where the scam is in that.

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, Terodius said:

You might want to go in for a check at your nearest psychiatrist lol. I got a bunch of cool products that I'm happy with at highly discounted prices through crowdfunded projects. Don't see where the scam is in that.

Crowd funding asks for funds without any legal resource or guarantees you'll ever see a product at all or one that is anywhere near as what it was originally promised.

 

Banks, venture capitalists and other sorts of legit investors often pass on projects precisely because they know they're unlikely to get a return from overly ambitious and under experienced enthusiasts. Just because you sometimes get a decent product doesn't means that you always will and in fact as time goes on and crowd funding becomes more popular more inexperienced naiive people (along with actual scammers just looking to grab the cash, deliver a half assed product to backers only and run) will continue to pop up until everyone it's so pissed off they'll ask the government to interfere and regulate crowd funding effectively killing their usefulness to potential projects anyway.

 

But instead of repeating I just call it a scam: you're being asked to make a good faith donation under false pretenses which is that you will get a product eventually. This is just morally wrong even if some projects do succeed.

[Revinval]

I think there are two issues here. If you spent 0-$45. You pretty much right now have the value back you spent. 

 

If you spent more than $150 you are never going to get the "value" of any other game that will ever release. That is okay people spend their money on things they like. 

[Juanitology]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

Just because you sometimes get a decent product doesn't means that you always will and in fact as time goes on and crowd funding becomes more popular more inexperienced naiive people (along with actual scammers just looking to grab the cash, deliver a half assed product to backers only and run) will continue to pop up until everyone it's so pissed off they'll ask the government to interfere and regulate crowd funding effectively killing their usefulness to potential projects anyway.

 

But instead of repeating I just call it a scam: you're being asked to make a good faith donation under false pretenses which is that you will get a product eventually. This is just morally wrong even if some projects do succeed.

I was satisfied with the product I got for every campaign I backed (that's 13) and everybody else I know who backed campaigns, some after I talked them into it, have been happy with their products.

Like I said, there have been a few high-profile cases of projects that went south, but that's a risk you assume when you participate in it. The opportunity cost of getting up to 80% off on the retail cost of a product is, among other things, the possibility of losing that money. It's a bet basically, you're hedging a bet that the project you backed will deliver the thing you want at a fraction of the price of what it would cost to buy it "safely" after it's already been developed and put out into the market. But the large majority of projects do deliver what they promise even if there's some eventual delays.