Author Topic: Star Citizen General BS  (Read 1249479 times)

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #720 on: August 05, 2017, 04:24:37 AM »
I don't know why Derek removed the charts, but the poll itself is here and all the results are here. So you can make your own charts. That the responses do not represent the whole of the SC community goes without saying.

Still, it clearly shows that there still are a number of utterly stupid people who don't (want to) realise that they're only wasting their money. Wasting as in, they are not going to get a working game for all the money they're spending. I really am worried about what some of those huge spenders might do after CIG collapses and their thousands and thousands of dollars are gone.

On the other hand, if somebody at this moment still buys stuff from CIG, maybe they deserve it. If you clearly don't want to listen, you just have to feel.

What is has to do with FUD, I don't know. I don't have any Fear or Uncertainty that Star Citizen is a Disaster.

What charts? The ones from yesterday? I posted them in the wrong forum so I relocated them. They are still on this page. And we have an entire section for actual data analytics.

There are still around 2K out of about 600K (the $1.5M count is rubbish, due to dupes) still putting money into this. And those analytics are very simple to run because the "clearly not fake" monthly funding is public.
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #721 on: August 05, 2017, 04:34:31 AM »
Quote
 

I don't know why Derek removed the charts

I told you. It's because they don't support his narrative. If half of 7k backers are willing to spend more money on ships, in itself more than 2k, then how many of 1.8 million forum accounts are willing to spend more money on ships?

Nice try.

And if we're talking about this chart, please explain to me how this has anything to do with the data about the average of 2K backers still propping up the project.



Quote
This is an interesting Reddit thread talking about Derek's sources: https://www.reddit.com/r/DerekSmart/comments/6roc1t/a_user_on_gamestar_reveals_that_derek_does_not/

Makes you think huh?

Yeah, it would make morons think. Anyway, you are very late to the party. Again, nice try.

Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #722 on: August 05, 2017, 05:27:28 AM »


Latest Star Citizen dev schedule is out. They went from clarity to obfuscation. Also dumped in a bunch of NEW crap to already LATE build.

Analysis below. It's not looking good. In fact, it's way worse. This explains Chris's demeanor and scared look in last AtV.

Diff: http://www.mergely.com/5yUuauMr/?wl=1

Schedule Report: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/schedule-report



Quote
While it seems impressive that they finished 7 tasks, keep in mind that

- 3 of those tasks still need bug fixing, which is really more obfuscation on how things are progressing.
- 3 More of those tasks were cosmetic fluff changes they added just a few weeks ago (and still managed to delay).
- 2 of those tasks had ETAs listed as June 9th. They were forgotten about for 2 months. So it's hard to say if they were completed 2 months ago or just recently.
- 1 of these (volumetric fog) was a feature that should've been easily ported over from lumberyard.

Notice the part about the server dying with 12-15 clients? That's not even new; but now they're acknowledging it so that becomes a "known issue". I had written about this performance issue back in June and also written about it again (with more detail) in July.

EXCUSES:

Quote
As mentioned in Around the Verse, as the majority of 3.0’s new features are now completed, we have shifted focus to feature/content integration, optimization and bug fixing. Aside from updating the few remaining outstanding features that are being developed, we’re adding a new section that will describe some of the major blocker bugs that have occurred over the past week, a detailed list of the bugs that were resolved, and a burndown report that will feature overall tracking of remaining bugs.

PURE FUD:

Quote
Completed: 7
Delayed: 3
Regressed: 2
Remaining: 9 (was 13)
Needs bug-fixing: 17 (was 14)
Total In-progress: 26 (was 30)
Furthest ETA: TBD or Aug 16th

COMPLETED:

Quote
- INVENTORY SYSTEM SUPPORT (Needs bug fixing)
- INVENTORY SYSTEM (Code Complete. Bug fixing to follow)
- MISSION BOARD APP (Feature Complete. Bug fixing in progress)
- VOLUMETRIC FOG
- RSI AURORA
- APOCALYPSE ARMS SCOURGE RAIL GUN
- GEMINI L86 PISTOL

DELAYED:

Quote
- ENTITY OWNER MANAGER - ETA is 11th August
Reason: LA Engineering identified further additional tasks needed to support persistence and netcode.

- CHARACTER CUSTOMIZATION - Still TBD

- SHIP SELECTOR APP & INSURANCE CLAIM - ETA is 11th August (was 3rd August)
Reason: Code is complete and now needs final hookup. Unfortunately, this has been delayed due to supporting bug fixing on the Arena Commander Loadout and Personal Manager. We need to have these features in a better state before too much progress is made on Vehicle customization. Otherwise, we would run the risk of having even more bugs to fix later.

REGRESSED:

Quote
- PLAYER MANNED TURRETS (No ETA)
- MISSION BOARD APP

OPEN:

Quote
- MISSION GIVERS
- ENTITY OWNER MANAGER
- CHARACTER CUSTOMIZATION
- VEHICLE CUSTOMIZER APP
- SHIP SELECTOR APP & INSURANCE CLAIM
- COMMS SYSTEM UI
- MISSION SYSTEM
- RENDER TO TEXTURE
- PLAYER MANNED TURRETS

BUG FIXING:

Quote
- INVENTORY SYSTEM SUPPORT
- INVENTORY SYSTEM
- ITEM 2.0 SHIP CONVERSION – PART 2
- INSURANCE
- DOORS AND AIRLOCKS
- CARGO
- CARGO MANIFEST APP
- KIOSK SUPPORT
- REPAIR
- HINT SYSTEM
- PERSONAL MANAGER APP
- MISSION MANAGER APP
- MISSION BOARD APP
- PHYSICS SERIALIZATION
- DRAKE DRAGONFLY
- RSI CONSTELLATION AQUILLA
- MISC PROSPECTOR

To make things worse, they added a slew of NEW items to the already bloated and LATE build. With no ETA. And NONE of them are going to be easy to implement.

Basically, they just added another +4-6 months or so to the schedule. I bet they are going to implement this in 3.0.x builds without encroaching on 3.1.

In case you were wondering why this is interesting, it's because I had previously written back in May that the internal dev schedule was NOT the same as the public one. So they appear to have decided to come clean with parts of the actual dev schedule now. Wow.

Quote
USER EXPERIENCE POLISH PASS :

Improvement of our overall framerate

We have decided to spend time increasing performance on the client and server side.

Player Count & General Stability

Currently, performance and stability drop sharply once the active players in a server reach 12-15 players.

Cockpit Experience

The Cockpit Experience sprint team is focused on improving the overall player experience in the cockpit through adjustments to cockpit geo, character placement, g-force/hit reactions, VFX, Audio, UI, and code support for things like camera shaking and hooking into ship health systems to display proper damage.

Space Landscaping

We are working on some extra Graphics code for the GPU particle system to support the creation of new VFX to implement space dust at points around Stanton. This will continue to be iterated on to create some more elaborate assets.

Basic Ship Security

With the gameplay we’re adding in to 3.0.0, we’re conscious that there may be some other players that would love to kill you and take your ship. To help prevent this, we wanted to implement some basic security that will allow you to lock the ship, so only you have the ability to pass freely through its doors.

Rotating and Orbiting Planets

We are very keen to make the Stanton map feel more organic as a real environment and having the planets rotate and orbit will really help with this.
This will also introduce a proper day/night cycle when you’re on a planet surface which in turn opens up further gameplay possibilities.

Player Interaction System – User Experience Improvements

We’re want to give players the ability to more intuitively interact with items and objects within the game, but also find ways to indicate to the player what type of interaction they would be performing (pick up, start conversation, push button, etc).

Race Tracks on Planets

To give our planetary environments extra points of interest, and also an excuse to drive ground-based vehicles around at high speed, we thought the best way to do this was to build some rudimentary race tracks on the planets that would have been previously used by the research teams as a way to blow off steam and have fun.

Fucking LOL if you still have money in this train wreck.  :lol: :lol: :lol:

« Last Edit: August 05, 2017, 05:30:11 AM by dsmart »
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

Motto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1023
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #723 on: August 05, 2017, 07:41:35 AM »
Remember Derek saying for some time now that they can't build a decent 3.0 build that will be ready to put out there and that they will keep on delaying it and delaying it? Are you willing to state here that Derek was right? That in fact CIG has been delaying and delaying and delaying the 3.0 build. Never mind the reason(s) for it, Derek predicted 3.0 not being ready for release any time soon despite the schedules. Was he right?

Derek might have sources within CIG, I don't know, but asking how someone managed to predict that CIG, known for missing their estimated release dates, would miss an estimated release date isn't exactly Nobel prize level thinking is it? Especially with something as technologically difficult as 3.0 and knowing the caveats from the schedule report that often get completely ignored around here. It's almost like you lot deliberately forget they're there for some reason...

So, you're not willing to admit that Derek was right. Your argument being that since CIG basically always misses their release dates, not to mention that those are "estimated" release dates so they can do with them whatever they want (why give them in the first place?), therefore predicting they miss a schedule isn't that difficult. Okay...

Let's try it again. Derek has been predicting for quite some time now that 3.0 is nowhere near a state that it is ready to be released nor that it will be on short term. That at least contradicts the words from Chris but hey, never mind. Now, what do you think is a proper timeframe to confirm Derek was right? How much extra time would it take for CIG not to release 3.0 for you to confirm that Derek was right about the state of 3.0? Another 2 months? 4 months? 6 months? If I give an estimated release date of June and that date steadily moves backwards now into September, maybe that is to be expected. But at what point at still not releasing 3.0 is it clear that Chris was talking out of his ass? What do you think? Or are you willing to say that no matter how much further delays on 3.0, that still doesn't prove Derek right with him saying that 3.0 is nowhere near to be released?

And, Derek predicts that the 3.0 build is still so crappy that that's why they haven't released it yet. They don't want to repeat the disaster that was the 2.0 / 2.5 release. But, in the end, they have to put 3.0 out there. Are you willing to agree now that if the 3.0 is as crappy as shit when it's being released, that Derek was right about that? Or are you going to use the excuse that no matter how long and hard they worked on the 3.0 build (see all the schedule updates and the AtV's et cetera for that, now more than a year since Chris said they were working on it) that is because they are doing things nobody has done before? If so, when will they deliver something that actually works? With 4.0? With 5.0? At what point would you stop saying "they're trying to" and start saying "they can't"? 2018? 2019? 2020? How much time are you willing to give Chris to put out a decent enough build to go from alpha to beta? Despite his promises made when starting this project.

Other than CIG collapsing and filing for bankruptcy, something that obviously would proof Derek right, what would it take for you to admit Derek was right? Please tell me, I'm really curious.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2017, 04:51:28 PM by Motto »

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #724 on: August 05, 2017, 08:34:40 AM »
Remember Derek saying for some time now that they can't build a decent 3.0 build that will be ready to put out there and that they will keep on delaying it and delaying it? Are you willing to state here that Derek was right? That in fact CIG has been delaying and delaying and delaying the 3.0 build. Never mind the reason(s) for it, Derek predicted 3.0 not being read for release any time soon despite the schedules. Was he right?

Derek might have sources within CIG, I don't know, but asking how someone managed to predict that CIG, known for missing their estimated release dates, would miss an estimated release date isn't exactly Nobel prize level thinking is it? Especially with something as technologically difficult as 3.0 and knowing the caveats from the schedule report that often get completely ignored around here. It's almost like you lot deliberately forget they're there for some reason...

So, you're not willing to admit that Derek was right. Your argument being that since CIG basically always misses their release dates, not to mention that those are "estimated" release dates so they can do with them whatever they want (why give them in the first place?), therefore predicting they miss a schedule isn't that difficult. Okay...

Let's try it again. Derek has been predicting for quite some time now that 3.0 is nowhere near a state that it is ready to be released nor that it will be on short term. That at least contradicts the words from Chris but hey, never mind. Now, what do you think is a proper timeframe to confirm Derek was right? How much extra time would it take for CIG not to release 3.0 for you to confirm that Derek was right about the state of 3.0? Another 2 months? 4 months? 6 months? If I give an estimated release date of June and that date steadily moves backwards now into September, maybe that is to be expected. But at what point at still not releasing 3.0 is it clear that Chris was talking out of his ass? What do you think? Or are you willing to say that no matter how much further delays on 3.0, that still doesn't prove Derek right with him saying that 3.0 is nowhere near to be released?

And, Derek predicts that the 3.0 build is still so crappy that that's why they haven't released it yet. They don't want to repeat the disaster that was the 2.0 / 2.5 release. But, in the end, they have to put 3.0 out there. Are you willing to agree now that if the 3.0 is as crappy as shit when it's being released, that Derek was right about that? Or are you going to use the excuse that no matter how long and hard they worked on the 3.0 build (see all the schedule updates and the AtV's et cetera for that, now more than a year since Chris said they were working on it) that is because they are doing things nobody has done before? If so, when will they deliver something that actually works? With 4.0? With 5.0? At what point would you stop saying "there trying to" and start saying "they can't"? 2018? 2019? 2020? How much time are you willing to give Chris to put out a decent enough build to go from alpha to beta? Despite his promises made when starting this project.

Other than CIG collapsing and filing for bankruptcy, something that obviously would proof Derek right, what would it take for you to admit Derek was right? Please tell me, I'm really curious.

I'm just going to watch.  :allears:
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

Serendipity

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #725 on: August 06, 2017, 01:58:37 AM »
Derek was right about the state of 3.0 when Chris announced it. Chris was wrong about when it would be ready. That doesn't make him a scumbag liar.

Derek was wrong about LoD's release date. By 5 years and counting. It doesn't make him a scumbag liar. I'm sure I've covered this before.

I don't care about 'delays' to estimated release dates. The money isn't running out anytime soon or they would have released more by now in a panic.

Looking forward to reading his Gamescom predictions. Should be very interesting.

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #726 on: August 06, 2017, 02:44:15 AM »
Derek was wrong about LoD's release date. By 5 years and counting. It doesn't make him a scumbag liar. I'm sure I've covered this before.

Derek isn't using $150m+ of backer money, pledged under a specific set of deadlines that were set to be met to deliver a specific product - so Derek can do whatever he wants with his own private project. CIG is in a whole different world to that and I'm surprised that you appear to be naive of that fact (either that or you're being deliberately obtuse).

Motto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1023
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #727 on: August 06, 2017, 02:45:29 AM »
The main difference between Chris and Derek being that Derek pays for the development upfront out of his own pocket. He didn't ask for millions and millions in crowdfunding advance to develop LoD. So that's a comparison that is without meaning. And you know that, so don't be daft.

However, my dear Serendipity, you didn't aswer my question. And that was a honest one from me, I really am curious.

Let's assume that Chris did start with this project with all good and proper intentions. I see no reason to think otherwise. Now, after some time into the development, Derek started claiming that the game - as pitched - can't be made. He also has stated that for some time now, Chris knows this too, but he has no option but to continue his operation and only can do so by lying to the backers and keep on asking them for money. And an important prediction is that 3.0 is nowhere near a stable release and it won't be for quite some time.

Now, my question remains: at what point are you willing to say that Derek was right about those things? No beating around the bush, just plain and simple. I think Derek was right when....
« Last Edit: August 06, 2017, 03:37:14 AM by Motto »

nightfire

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #728 on: August 06, 2017, 03:13:32 AM »
The money isn't running out anytime soon or they would have released more by now in a panic.
Since you keep bringing up observations and conclusions which are completely unrelated to Star Citizen (such as pointing to LoD’s delays/shortcomings/problems when discussing Star Citizen’s delays/shortcomings/problems) – actually deflection has to be one of your most used (and most obvious) rhetorics in this forum – I’ll make an exception for once and will do this too.

Youtube hobby machinist channel „AvE“, best known for his foul language and zero BS tolerance, has exactly the right shirt for you in store!  :dance:


dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #729 on: August 06, 2017, 05:46:41 AM »
Derek was wrong about LoD's release date. By 5 years and counting. It doesn't make him a scumbag liar. I'm sure I've covered this before.

Just going to quote this for the sheer stupidity within.

Somehow comparing a self-funded indie project, which is no different from any other project by other devs, publishers etc which have their own funding, budget, release dates, delays etc - NONE of which they are accountable to ANYONE for, is somehow the same as Star Citizen whereby Chris Roberts consistently LIES to backers who have given him $155M and to whom he is 100% ACCOUNTABLE after FAILING to release even 15% of a game in 6 years.

Yes, it hurts, I know, but those are 100% FACTS. No obfuscation or deflection is going to change that.
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4915
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #730 on: August 06, 2017, 06:04:24 AM »
Star Citizen 3.0. The journey.

Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #731 on: August 06, 2017, 06:14:39 AM »
Star Citizen 3.0. The journey.



damn i thought it was a race and was cheering on purple :(

in fairness though there's probably more of a game in that chart than what's currently in SC

Serendipity

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #732 on: August 06, 2017, 06:20:58 AM »
You guys seem to have trouble understanding. I'm not comparing development of LoD and SC. I've mentioned this before at least once. I'll say it again so maybe you might just understand it this time...maybe.

How the game's are funded is irrelevant. Who's making the games is irrelevant. What kind of games they are is irrelevant.

The point is this, Derek thought he'd be finishing his game in 2012 and gave an interview where he said it would be releasing at the end of 2011 or q1 2012. That didn't happen. Chris said they were attempting to get 3.0 to us by Dec of last year. That didn't happen.

Neither of these 2 game developers are evil, lying scumbags because their games have suffered delays.

Is that simple enough now?


helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #733 on: August 06, 2017, 06:33:29 AM »
How the game's are funded is irrelevant. Who's making the games is irrelevant. What kind of games they are is irrelevant.

That's where you're wrong kiddo. Analogies are my preferred way to explain a point so I'm gonna use an analogy.

Person A: Offers to build a bridge and asks for people for funding to build it - in return they get to use the bridge. Over time the bridge becomes ever-more complex and is still unrecognizable as a bridge years into the project.

Person B: Has a bit of private land and set themselves a personal target to build a bridge on their own land.

N0mad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: Star Citizen - The Game
« Reply #734 on: August 06, 2017, 06:49:58 AM »
Serendipity you said:
I'm not comparing development of LoD and SC.
Before going on to compare the development of the 2 games.

Please can we stop with this nonsense. IF Derek's game stops development tomorrow then he's accountable only to himself - nobody else is affected. IF Star Citizen stops development tomorrow then thousands of people will lose money.

Please stop trying to compare the 2 games - we know you're only doing it to try and wind up Derek.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk