I was expecting 25 minutes of gameplay. I skimmed the video, but it looks like around 5-8 minutes of cut-up gameplay, maybe another 8-10 minutes of cutscenes, and the rest looks like the “making of”. I did not see any evidence of a product that is anywhere near completion.
No, 10 years since the announcement of their intent to build the game. Then they had to build the company, the engine, and they are building 2 games at once (SQ42 and StarCitizen).
Developing a AAA single player game + an MMO at the same time, with the components working across the 2, and now being at the point where they are feature complete on SQ42, is pretty impressive.
I still kind of doubt it’s going anywhere fast. Because a game with this scope has already signed up for some pretty massive post-launch support. Let’s be generous and say it takes them another 2-3 years to develop this single player and another 5-6 to finish star citizen. That’s very generous.
They started pre-production in 2010. So it’s already been 13 years of development with near unlimited money on SC. So again, add 5 years till a mainstream launch and another 3-5 years of active support and you’ll be well over two decades deep in a single games development. That’s half of someone’s career to develop one game. Now we add another game on top of this.
The other game is admittedly much easier to develop but still it will take massive amounts of support. If Bethesda can’t do it well, why does anyone think this dev can and in such good time? I have my doubts.
They didn’t start pre-production in 2010, that’s when they started building the Kickstarter video, unless you’re counting the broad story strokes in CR’s head as “pre-production”, in which case Starfield was in pre-production for 25+ years. :P
Development on SQ42 started in 2013, and 10 years to not only build a game, but the engine tech and the studios as well, is not at all crazy given the game. Major games like RDR2 and GTAV take 8+ years, and they are working with already-established teams, and not doing anything crazy tech-wise.
And yes, MMOs have extremely long lives, both pre- and post-release. Eve is over 20 now. WoW is who knows how old. Maple Story devs have literally had kids and watched them go off to college.
I won’t tell people what to do with their money, but it’s clear people have bought in to both of these games existing. And if it were my money, I’d want to believe in these devs. But for the rest of us, these games need to materialize as functional and fully featured releases for us to care.
And I don’t think the timeline is crazy so far with their development. What’s wild to me is thinking that a newly founded studio, even a well funded one, can knock out a competent single player and MMO with these scopes. It’s slim chances from an outsiders perspective.
Take a look at what mature and well funded studios are putting out in 2023. The likes of Starfield are actually some of the better cases. I know the incentives are different, but still. So I’m expecting a lot of tooling to need to be done for both these games to exist and exist at an enjoyable playability by the end of the 20s.
Anyways, im not trying to kill enthusiasm for people who enjoy interest in the project but to everyone outside of that, this isn’t reassuring. All large scope games should be considered to be nonexistent until they hit reviewers hands at this point.
You are basically throwing out the existence of bad AAA games to discredit the idea that people can pull off AAA games. Here’s a secret; in software development, money and experience cannot overcome bad management. Lots of publisher-driven games release as crap because the publishers have them pegged to a certain financial quarter they want to show a revenue pull in, irregardless of where the game is at.
But for the rest of us, these games need to materialize as functional and fully featured releases for us to care.
I think it’s fair to hold early access games with skepticism, but plenty of people do play early access games (and SC).
But also, CitCon is first and foremost an event for current players, not a marketing one for new players. It’s a bunch of dev panels on nitty-gritty details of things like UI design, flight model physics changes, npc AI design, backend economy simulations, sound and lighting, etc. The SQ42 video was them throwing current players a live-view bone about the state of SQ42 development, rather than just the usual Jira-derived sprint status reports and development milestone updates that we get every 2 weeks.
All large scope games should be considered to be nonexistent until they hit reviewers hands at this point.
This is just cynicism about publisher-driven game-dev. It may be justified for those, but SC is not one of those, it’s quite literally an “indie” (publisher-independent) game. Plenty of independent game developers create “large-scope” games (Grim Dawn, Kenshi, Rimworld, Project Zomboid, etc) that have scope and depth (e.g. in number and complexity of mechanics) comparable to what AAA games do.
If people had not been actually playing SC (since what, 2016 for PU release iirc?) then I’d understand the idea of its potential “non-existence”, but it’s hard for me to take that stance seriously when it’s sitting on my harddrive right now.
Last night I did 2 ‘bunker missions’ (infiltrate facility, kill bad guys, loot), and salvaged 3 derelict ships. Night before that I was doing bounties on NPCs and running bomber support for some guys who had gotten pinned down by another group of players at a planet-side wreck site (Ghost Hollow). I don’t do mining, or cargo hauling, or drug running, or ship or ground pvp, or player-rescue medical missions, or racing, or investigations, but those are also in there.
I swear sometimes it’s like the people who talk about SC ‘not releasing’ seem to have no clue about what has literally already been released.
A lot of people tend to forget, comparing SC’s timeline of development to other AAA games doesn’t work when those games are pushed out early, rushed to the finish line by publishers who don’t care about polish, only sales numbers, and are fine with compromise at every level.
Chris Roberts doesn’t do compromise. Every system in SC is created for hyper realism, down to working hydraulics and gears for the moving parts of ships. He wants everything to be perfect, and he’ll call it done when he’s happy with it.
And like you said, it’s technically playable right now. I’ve never before been part of an alpha development, able to make posts about bugs that actually get read, commented on, and fixed by the dev team. Most game “betas” are just a 3 day early-access where nothing will actually change.
The game is hyped up so much because we see the potential, enjoy playing what we can, and love having a say in it’s development.
Ken Lord was one of those fans, and an early backer of Star Citizen. He’s got a Golden Ticket, a mark on his account that singles him out as an early member of the community. Between April 2013 and April 2018, Ken pledged $4,495 to the project. The game still isn’t out, and Lord wants his money back. RSI wouldn’t refund it, so Lord took the developer to small-claims court in California.
According to the game’s original pitch on Kickstarter, it would be a space sim with a co-op multiplayer game, an offline single-player experience, and a persistent universe. It’s since become a massively multiplayer online game and a separate single-player game with first-person shooter elements called Squadron 42, which RSI originally pitched as “A Wing Commander style single player mode, playable OFFLINE if you want.”
Along with the game—which originally had a targeted release date of 2014—Lord was supposed to have received numerous bits of physical swag. “So aside from [the game], I’m supposed to get a spaceship USB drive, silver collector’s box, CDs, DVDs, spaceship blueprints, models of the spaceship, a hardback book,” he said. “That’s the making of Star Citizen, which—if they end up making this game—might turn into an encyclopedia set.”
So if they still are on the hook to provide all that stuff and many people are in a similar situation to this guy, that’s a lot of merch that they gotta produce after they have done the game.
According to the game’s original pitch on Kickstarter, it would be a space sim with a co-op multiplayer game, an offline single-player experience, and a persistent universe. It’s since become a massively multiplayer online game and a separate single-player game with first-person shooter elements called Squadron 42, which RSI originally pitched as “A Wing Commander style single player mode, playable OFFLINE if you want.”
This is what bugs me the most about this whole fiasco. I paid into the original Kickstarter because Wing Commander through Freelancer were my favorite games and I wanted more of that.
The current project, even if we were to VERY charitably call it a game and call it playable, is nothing like Wing Commander or Freelancer.
If they were still making an actual Wing Commander type game after all this time, my copium might still be in full effect. But this current… THING… isn’t even the game they promised in the first place. It’s so disappointing.
I didn’t quote that bit, but that’s actually what he was upset about too.
For Lord, it’s no longer the game he thought he was getting. The first person mode is an especially hard sell. “I have [multiple sclerosis],” he told me. “My hands shake badly. I have tremors…They just recently confirmed that you have to do the first-person shooter thing to get through Squadron 42. I can’t do that, I just can’t do that. So my money’s stuck in a game I can’t possibly play.”
I played Elite for a little bit, maybe a month or two, before it got to the point where it just felt like a job.
I love the X series. I have hundreds of hours in X4. It’s definitely my favorite of the bunch.
Everspace 2 was fun, but never hoked me for some reason.
The most “Wing Commander” game in recent memory was Star Wars: Squadrons, IMHO. Shame they decided to make it CoD in space though… I’m not big on the multplayer aspect and the single player campaign was super short.
Starfield was a huge disappointment. etc etc
I believe they said the last expansion for X4 was the last one. Here’s hoping there’s an X5 coming.
played Elite for a little bit, maybe a month or two, before it got to the point where it just felt like a job
Yeah, it never really clicked for me, and I didn’t like the “faux online” aspect either. I bet that it’s probably pretty in VR, though.
I love the X series. I have hundreds of hours in X4. It’s definitely my favorite of the bunch.
Ah, okay, I didn’t think that that’d be your cup of tea, because while the game does have fighters, it tends to favor large ship combat, and my take is that the dogfighting isn’t too elaborate – like, if you can leverage strafing in X2, the enemy AI isn’t all that great at predicting where you’ll be. There isn’t, I don’t know, breaking missile locks or whatever. Though I guess that exploiting dead zones in fields of fire is a thing. And there’s a management focus, and the ability to indirectly manage many ships. I hadn’t played much of X4 myself, though I did do X3 a fair bit.
Do you enjoy the fleet command aspect of it? There’s a game that I recall that felt more like a fleet naval combat simulator in space, not on the first-person dogfighting aspect. Lots of naval warfare-ish jargon, focus on sensor and counter-sensor stuff – I suspect that people who like something leaning a bit more milsim would like that. It was early access when I played it, but probably enough to have some fun with it. Let me find the name.
They flash through a lot of functionality in a few seconds quickly in the demo vids there on steam, but you can see the ship and weapon configuration, fleet and ship commands, system-specific damage control, some of the electronic warfare stuff, things like that.
So, I enjoyed what was there, but I can imagine someone finding the faux-naval jargon a bit opaque. Sort of like operating a naval group, with ships with specialized roles. The graphics are okay, but beauty isn’t their goal – they’re trying to do a combat environment in space.
I actually ran across it when looking for a non-space milsim fleet naval combat game, and was pleasantly-surprised.
I’m not big on the multplayer aspect
Yeah, ditto.
Starfield was a huge disappointment
I liked it, but then I wanted a Skyrim or Fallout 4 out of it, not a space combat game. Yeah, the space combat there isn’t much more than a pretty minigame.
Well to be fair, X4 isn’t my favorite of the bunch because of its (lack of) similarity to Wing Commander. It’s not really that kind of game. But it is fun and scratches the space economy itch more like a Freelancer or Eve.
I hadn’t hard of Nebulous. I see what they’re going for graphically (Homeworld style). I’ll have to keep an eye on it. But yeah the fleet combat part of X4 never quite got me interested beyond “if I make 100 fighters, I should be able to take out pretty much anything”. Controlling large fleets was always a weakness of the game, one of the janky bits. But Building stations, setting up an economy, piracy, and all that stuff is still fun.
But yeah the fleet combat part of X4 never quite got me interested beyond “if I make 100 fighters, I should be able to take out pretty much anything”.
Ah, okay. I was just trying to figure out how it differed from some of the other things you listed, and fleet combat was one. But the economic side is another, and, yeah, I can see the economic side of the X series being appealing if building a big space empire is a goal.
If you’re looking for a space economic sim, that’s entirely-absent from NEBULOUS, and in fact they even mention that up-front on the product page – they’re going for combat simulation. So it won’t fill that slot.
Yeah, probably not my cuppa tea, but I will keep an eye on it. Space ships blowing each other up has potential, even if it’s not my favorite style of said activity.
And I bet it releases before Star Citizen for a fraction of the price!
Sorry to bear the bad news, but Elite: Dangerous has abandoned developing any further VR functionality.
To my knowledge VR still works in ship cockpits and is still amazing there, but the last big expansion’s big draw added new on foot content that doesn’t support VR at all. In VR it displays in headset as a giant 2D screen in front of you, if it chooses to work with the headset at all.
The tech debt they have and will incur alone will be a huge mountain to climb. You can't develop a game for that long without having to go back and completely rebuild things with newer tools.
Even their rewards show their age now. CD and DVD collections and such. What's going to happen when it comes time to fulfill all those merch order for backers in 2028 or whenever? What happens when virtually no one uses disc media anymore and they are struggling to even burn all this stuff?
This is my main concern about the game. With tech that moves this quickly, you have to understand that game companies who are established are living on the very edge of that debt.
Like starfield for example. Who knows how old it’s code is from the start of its development. It’s why Bethesda games break frequently and crash often. When you develop games on a 8-10 year cycle, think of how many hardware generations that is. 3 to 4 right? So when you’re talking about building an engine, then running it and building a game, then supporting it, all over the coarse of 15-20 years of coding? It’s a giant mess to program and there’s no way in hell it can be optimized properly.
Not to mention the massive task of upgrading the game as new hardware and new engine features arrive.
It’s going to get ugly when the chickens come home to roost on this one. They are slowly marching towards $1 billion. They are over $600mill already. And people still donate. It’s baffling.
Currently Star Citizen is at the #1 spot for the most money spent on a video game’s development on this list. And that’s including adjustment for inflation.
It's even worse if you look further down on the other unofficial figures list at Marvel's Avengers. It nearly costed as much as Red Dead Redemption 2 (also unofficial numbers). My assumption is, that the license is in these costs included and why it balooned it.
That's easy when you consider that there hasn't been basically any sort information about S42 for a long time now. Still doesn't really prove anything about a potentially finished product.
I was skimming it, but there did appear to be a couple of E3-type gameplay footage clips. I can’t say if they are new or not because I haven’t been following SC closely.
Wouldn’t it just be perfect irony if they run completely out of money before managing to release something/anything? Though with how many people put in money over and over even though progress over the years has been slow to say the least I guess the more likely outcome is nuclear holocaust putting a damper on the release schedule.
I still remember being in college and hearing people in the lab next to me excitedly proclaim that they were able to pay $100 for a rare ship that has X Y Z features including handling, top speed, and fashionable interiors.
They weren’t able to use the ship yet, but oh man was it a great investment for when they’d one day be able to ride them.
So fucking bizarre. But, if you have people out there thinking like my then peers, you’re guaranteed to have a long term stream of income based on loose promises alone.
They lost me like exactly after I put in money and started the insurance idea. I regret heavily putting money directly to the main site instead of kickstarter, at least I might have chance to get a refund or something since the pitch content changed.
Haven’t they made close to a billion dollars when counting the Kickstarter, starter packs sold via the website, and the “microtransactions” for things like ships (which are more macro than micro with the prices often being way over 100€)? I doubt they’ll run out of money any time soon, although hookers and blow definitely aren’t free
Scientology has been running strong from their grift for decades.
They are going to eventually run dry when they’ve burned through every ounce of their reputation. But it’s a long, long path of riches and broken dreams in the meantime. By the time it’s finally done, Chris and the other COs will have retired with their hundreds of millions, and they won’t care.
Horrible, but also really impressive how they manipulate people. Forced engagement in the weekend leagues, resetting the game periodically…the addicts don’t stand a chance.
Haven’t played fifa but understand that loot boxes are basically gambling. Arguably worse than gambling because with gambling at least you might win something “real”.
Curious though - there was a screenshot in the article where you could preview a loot box before buying - does that not make it more like “buying” the players instead of “gambling” for them?
All packs for sale in the FUT Shop have an eye icon and a button to trigger the preview. Doing that exposes its contents as if the player actually had bought the pack and opened it.
Once the player has seen the revealed cards, they may then buy the pack with either FUT Coins (the free in-game currency) or FUT Points (the premium). If they don’t like what they see, they don’t have to buy the pack. But there will now be a 24-hour wait period before they can preview another pack or buy a different one in its class. If they buy the pack, that timer immediately expires.
I remember getting getting sucked into opening packs years ago in Madden Ultimate team. I stopped when I realized I had spent twice over what the game itself cost. I stopped then, and never played ultimate team again. I am not an addictive person, but even the most strong minded individual can get sucked into their vortex. The fact that lawmakers let this industry be self regulated means these companies can keep abusing players.
i did that once with microsoft points i got for my birthday. never did it again when i found out that after X number of games all those great players i have cannot be used unless i buy some fucking dumb shit thing to refill their playing meter? or something dumb like that
This stuff is why “it’s optional” and “it’s just cosmetic” are bullshit arguments.
If you can resist the urge, you’re not the intended target. They don’t make record profits from people who can spend somewhat rationally, even though those are the vast majority of users their contribution to profits is a drop in an ocean.
No, the only reason this model works so well is because it’s exploiting the vulnerabilities of a small percent of big spenders.
So, do you consider paying for more rolls part of the fun?
Because the rest, including the hit of endorphin you get for a stroke of luck, could very well exist without it. But of course on EA’s side getting people addicted has no point if they don’t pay virtually unlimited amounts of money for more.
Not this game in particular. I do gamble and love spending a few hundred every year. I’ll regularly drop $10 or$20 on a mobile time killer when I need them.
You do realize this whole thread and post is about gambling addiction yes? You’re essentially doing the “I have a black friend, I can’t be racist!” but for gambling addiction.
Here's a fun suggestion, how about you unlock the desired players by playing the game? Could even put it into an immersive context, you beat brazil and subsequently unlock their players for your team.
What's so fun about buying a chance to get your player? Is it possibly the shiny colors and the happy soundeffects that are specifically designed to make your brain addicted?
Whales subsidize the cost of the game for everyone else. If there weren’t whales, the cost goes up for everyone or the product diminishes. Reality isn’t a magical realm where the company will not use ROI and net profit to determine what to make or how to price things, it’s all interrelated and you don’t get to hold everything else constant when asking for something to change.
you do realize you’re just saying that the predatory business has to be predatory otherwise they couldn’t operate their predatory business, right? It’s like a sheep defending wolves because if they didn’t eat sheep they wouldn’t be able to continue eating sheep.
I’ve spent €45 for a Mario game yesterday. Last I’ve checked that game costs roughly the same for everyone (except understandable variations in regional pricing). Not €45 once for me and $2,000 per week for some guy with an addiction problem.
Yet that game was made, and thousands more that didn’t rely on gacha, lootboxes or whatever.
People with a gambling addiction will find an outlet for it unless they get help controlling it, just like people with any addiction. Addiction is treated on an individual basis, not by banning an activity that the vast majority of the population can partake in with self-control.
We don’t have tons of public numbers to be able to discuss the initial development, licensing, marketing, support and ongoing development, distribution and overhead costs vs initial costs, expansion and MTX income of games at a large scale. But you can be sure the companies that make the games have those numbers, and they’re used for pricing and budgeting of future development. And that’s before we open the can of worms that is discussing how much profit is ethical.
Maybe they could make less money, maybe they could not make certain features, but where does the ethical line fall when it comes to predatory features and marketing? Who needs protection? From who? How do you implement it without infringing the rights of others? Is it ok to let them gamble if there’s a deterministic worst-case scenario? What if there’s a limit on how much they can spend? What if purchases are purely only deterministic, but they’re limited time exclusives that will never return? What about if you can earn them by playing or pay extra to just get them up front or faster? What about if they carve that feature out of the main product and sell it as an additional cost? These are all predatory in some way, but we don’t need to ban them all when a person can make their own value judgments and interact with games in a way that brings them enjoyment. Otherwise, it’s a slippery slope to asking why we even let people “waste” money on entertainment.
And yet plenty drugs and medicine are controlled substances because they’d be so easy to abuse or hurt yourself with. We could just assign the same to ingame gambling, no? Since that’s also on an individual basis, handle it the same all around?
So to buy a lootbox:
Go to a doctor.
Doctor prescribes you a daily dosage of say, 1 lootbox.
Each day you can go to the pharmacy and pick up a pack of 1 lootbox code, you can have at maximum a store of 4 of them at home then pharmacies stop giving you more so you cannot stockpile. (going by the pills a friend of mine gets prescribed here)
No, whales subsidize the cost of a yacht for the CEO. The games could be paid just from the money you pay for them, if the companies weren’t continuously being siphoned off the top by C-suites and shareholders.
Really glad to see this finally hit 1.0; idiosyncratic titles like this are my favourite thing about Early Access. For all the early, often substantiated negativity about the model, it enables developers to work on a lot of cool stuff.
That’s just sad. I invested so much time grinding my way through this game and engineering my 6 ships and getting a fleet carrier only to be ultimately disappointed by the lack of content and lackluster updates.
It saddens me that I now have to look forward to that mess of a tech demo called Star Citizen, but I’ve already burned my money on that too, so I’m only left with a dream.
Been playing World of Horror since it entered early access, great to see it finally getting a full release. It is a great time if you're a Junji Ito fan or just a fan of cosmic horror in general.
I absolutely love World of Horror! It just hit 1.0, so if you were looking to try it out nows a great time! Also worth mentioning that it has modding support, so you can go on the discord and extend the games content a ton (not that it’s really short on content to begin with)
rockpapershotgun.com
Gorące