The point should have been obvious. They are and have always been misleading people to get money out of them.
Is it misleading people or bad management? I can never tell with all these GREAT arguments. Heck maybe it's both! As long as we get a good game at the end of it though it will have all been worth it hey? Hang in there soldier, chin up!
Please don't cut off the part of the post that supports what was said in the part you quoted.
Yes, it would be nice to have some decent back and forth discussion.
That's great to hear! tell me, what was your feedback on the 2.6 flight characteristics and what do you hope to see in this area when you try 3.0?
Sadly this seems to have been met with a lot of silence for now
I have no problem extending the invitation to discuss opinions on 2.6 flight characteristics and their hopes for flight changes during 3.0 to any of the other naysayers / marmite haters here. I don't think this is off topic is it? seems pertinent to me.
We all know that Chris Roberts has been working on that project for the last decade or more. Not 2011. But that is Chris .. PERSONALLY ... not a company ... not a team of people. HE was working on the story and the concept of the game to give a sales pitch to potential investors.
THEN he added his wife and his lawyer.
THEN (and by now we are in April 2012) he added half a dozen old friends to make a CryEngine trailer. CIG was founded. CIG back then was financed by Roberts himself at first.
THEN (and we are now in October 2012) the crowdfunding campaign started.
Stop interpreting more into those interviews than what is stated.
I give up lol, they're actual showing some progression, but of course there must be something wrong, there must be some hidden agenda or deception involved. It's all FAKE NEWS.
...so you are finally getting a hang of how this show is run.
Oh come the fuck on, no ones said you have to be always positive, actually would like some back and forth discussions, the only reason is seems the way you think, is because you guys are constantly negative and i mean constantly, no matter what the discussion.
...when you have project so messed up like this, you don't find much nice thing to say nor it supports any positive attitude, assuming you have a bit of common sense and some general knowledge about business and sw development.
(just for clarification this video is aimed at that obvious fool Chris Roberts, who we are all allowed to slander until the cows come home with no repercussions! I would never dare to post this as a comment directed towards a fellow MMORPG member! for as we know they are all marvelous.)
Roberts is not the one being foolish with fundraising.
As far as slander goes, every week I talk to four people who worked with Roberts at Origin. Talking to them (and other Origin exs here in Austin) lead me to predict feature creep, disorganization and poor management, underperformance and underdelivery in SC. From the time of the kickstarter.
Even with 3.0, it is pretty clear it's missing tons of stuff promoted as a part of it in official statements last year. On the one hand, that's slightly positive that they actually drop some stuff rather than trying to get it all in. On the other hand, upper management still continually overinflates their predictions. Especially when a new ship is about to hit the sales hangar.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Yes, it would be nice to have some decent back and forth discussion.
That's great to hear! tell me, what was your feedback on the 2.6 flight characteristics and what do you hope to see in this area when you try 3.0?
Sadly this seems to have been met with a lot of silence for now
I have no problem extending the invitation to discuss opinions on 2.6 flight characteristics and their hopes for flight changes during 3.0 to any of the other naysayers / marmite haters here. I don't think this is off topic is it? seems pertinent to me.
I find this completely amazing. Not a single SC detractor here on MMORPG has any opinion they can discuss and share on one of the most discussed and heated topics amongst people who actually play or have played the game at least long enough to form any opinions?
It's almost like the only reason you post is to hate on Chris Roberts!
I find this one very interesting. I followed the game from about 10M raised and on, there may have been some feature creep early on as funds grew (prior to the 10m), but I am not sure I have seen any significant feature creep that wasn't included in design talks from way back then.
As for mismanagement, I don't think I have worked in a single job where the underlings didn't complain about mismanagement!
edit: "Even with 3.0, it is pretty clear it's missing tons of stuff promoted as a part of it in official statements last year." What tons of stuff is it missing?
Funny: 3.0 delayed many months. Then 3.0 LAUNCH! "for private in house testing", then 3.0 LAUNCH ! "testing on PTR", then, ok LAUNCH 3.0! public?!? ...
I'm not a female dog, stop trying to impregnate me..
Oh come the fuck on, no ones said you have to be always positive, actually would like some back and forth discussions, the only reason is seems the way you think, is because you guys are constantly negative and i mean constantly, no matter what the discussion.
...when you have project so messed up like this, you don't find much nice thing to say nor it supports any positive attitude, assuming you have a bit of common sense and some general knowledge about business and sw development.
The project is "so messed up" is your opinion though and it's not like any of the argument brought up are based on present info/updates, so for us to go "Okay, I see your point", there the same lines used over the course of this 6 year development, some of them not making any sort of sense anymore.
A perfect example was rodarin who didn't even bother to read the patch notes, until asked serval times, but was already complaining and throwing negativity, saying he has sources. This tends to be the trend in most SC threads, not reading whats being said and just throwing their two cents in on how they dislike CR/CIG/SC and that it's all misleading to take your money. I'm not sure how that contributes to any sort of discussion whatsoever.
I know the project isn't perfect and has it's "for fuck sake" moments, but based on what I know, I just don't see it being as bad as you do. I expect bugs to be in an alpha, based on what i know, but some don't i guess.
As for mismanagement, I don't think I have worked in a single job where the underlings didn't complain about mismanagement!
That is a bit of a cheap get out of jail card.
When you 5 years down the road still have to deliver the functionality you estimated to 1½ years, then yeah, you have a management problem.
But honestly I do not really see it as a problem anymore. They have a devoted following that are ready to pay for that lost time and even sees it a project strength. When that is the situation, why hell should you really worry about optimizing the process? It is a dream position to be in. You can squander all the cash away doing R&D and research and noone holding you accountable. No need for management then.
Shit, who would not want to work like that? All the time in the world and no accountability. I hope Roberts is counting his blessings each night. He is in a pretty unique situation in the history of gaming.
But that does not change the fact that the guy has fuck all management skill.
When you 5 years down the road still have to deliver the functionality you estimated to 1½ years, then yeah, you have a management problem.
Isn't this a pointless exaggeration of events? Original plan wasn't to roll the game out this way. It is only since raising significant funds coupled with success in R&D that items and plans that were initially planned to be added after launch were brought forward to make 'construction' of the whole a higher quality.
I don't think that is a management problem, it's a management call for the benefit of the overall project that could only be made mid way as funding became more secure. A call that could possibly not be made in the usual process of a project this large already underway. Certainly a benefit stemming from from the crowdfunded model and lack of investors from CIG's PoV. Not that there hasn't been delay and possible mismanagement here and there, just like any large project I ever worked on.
I don't really think it is right to be calling this method or that method bad at this point. It is probably better to wait until the project is out the door before over analysing the pro's and con's to what imo is the most interesting development process surrounding gaming that I can remember.
Edit: Also, I would like to say that CR is bound to feel a large amount of pressure and is beholden to his backers to some degree. If the base ever turned on him it probably would have been all over. I am sure 3.0 being rolled out is a massive relief to all at CIG.
edit: "Even with 3.0, it is pretty clear it's missing tons of stuff promoted as a part of it in official statements last year." What tons of stuff is it missing?
"it is pretty clear it's missing tons of stuff promoted"
still not seeing it. in fact, going by the patch notes they have included a lot more than they promoted, and they claim that those are not full patch notes for live version.
It's gone from almost a full solar system to a tiny corner of a solar system and yet it's somehow more?
Is Stanton System Rollout the only thing in 3.0?
Either it's less, or they just decided to go a totally different direction for 3.0 than what's been advertised for a while prior to its release.
3.0 was supposed to see additions to the already available Stanton System, if Vrika's post is any indication. It, instead, is the introduction of a small portion of the system.
Your post about including a lot more than was promoted stinks of white-knight deflection of the highest order.
edit: "Even with 3.0, it is pretty clear it's missing tons of stuff promoted as a part of it in official statements last year." What tons of stuff is it missing?
As I understand it, 3.0 does, at least, include the debut of the planetary tech mentioned, right?
The celestial bodies released for exploration are procedurally generated? Do I understand that part correctly?
Either it's less, or they just decided to go a totally different direction for 3.0 than what's been advertised for a while prior to its release.
I did not claim there is not less to the Stanton rollout. I questioned a comment about 'tons of stuff missing' from 3.0 and stated that from the patch notes it seems a lot more has been included in 3.0 than what was promoted.
From what I can see
Crusader is the gas giant below the current exploreable space station port olisar - missing ability to fly into gas
Hurston - fauna tech.
ArcCorp - city modules.
Microtech - bio domes / farming
That is what is missing? while disappointing, I struggle to get behind the notion that this is equal to loads of stuff missing when you examine the systems and tech that is being introduced with 3.0. This missing tech is being worked on though and slated for later inclusion to 3.x right?
this is really great news! Evocati have 3.0 and now we just have to wait and see if the bug catching and fixing process is more robust and efficient; they have added some co-ordinate linking feature to better identify problem areas which is a great step.
just 2 more steps before non-bug reporting backers get their hands on 3.0 and my hat goes off to those willing to play the buggiest builds and give feedback, you are making all of our experiences better, so keep up the great work.
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!" For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
edit: "Even with 3.0, it is pretty clear it's missing tons of stuff promoted as a part of it in official statements last year." What tons of stuff is it missing?
As I understand it, 3.0 does, at least, include the debut of the planetary tech mentioned, right?
The celestial bodies released for exploration are procedurally generated? Do I understand that part correctly?
planet tech is in as far as we know yes.
they call it procedurally assisted. procedural generation to some degree but with over sight of the artists so it does not look terrible, with many procedural Points of interest acting the same way, procedural generation but with hand crafted oversight.
Comments
Thank you for your time.
I have no problem extending the invitation to discuss opinions on 2.6 flight characteristics and their hopes for flight changes during 3.0 to any of the other naysayers / marmite haters here. I don't think this is off topic is it? seems pertinent to me.
We all know that Chris Roberts has been working on that project for the last decade or more. Not 2011. But that is Chris .. PERSONALLY ... not a company ... not a team of people. HE was working on the story and the concept of the game to give a sales pitch to potential investors.
THEN he added his wife and his lawyer.
THEN (and by now we are in April 2012) he added half a dozen old friends to make a CryEngine trailer. CIG was founded. CIG back then was financed by Roberts himself at first.
THEN (and we are now in October 2012) the crowdfunding campaign started.
Stop interpreting more into those interviews than what is stated.
Have fun
It was about time.
As far as slander goes, every week I talk to four people who worked with Roberts at Origin. Talking to them (and other Origin exs here in Austin) lead me to predict feature creep, disorganization and poor management, underperformance and underdelivery in SC. From the time of the kickstarter.
Even with 3.0, it is pretty clear it's missing tons of stuff promoted as a part of it in official statements last year. On the one hand, that's slightly positive that they actually drop some stuff rather than trying to get it all in. On the other hand, upper management still continually overinflates their predictions. Especially when a new ship is about to hit the sales hangar.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
It's almost like the only reason you post is to hate on Chris Roberts!
As for mismanagement, I don't think I have worked in a single job where the underlings didn't complain about mismanagement!
edit: "Even with 3.0, it is pretty clear it's missing tons of stuff promoted as a part of it in official statements last year." What tons of stuff is it missing?
I'm not a female dog, stop trying to impregnate me..
Yeah I just wanna play 3.0!
A perfect example was rodarin who didn't even bother to read the patch notes, until asked serval times, but was already complaining and throwing negativity, saying he has sources. This tends to be the trend in most SC threads, not reading whats being said and just throwing their two cents in on how they dislike CR/CIG/SC and that it's all misleading to take your money. I'm not sure how that contributes to any sort of discussion whatsoever.
I know the project isn't perfect and has it's "for fuck sake" moments, but based on what I know, I just don't see it being as bad as you do. I expect bugs to be in an alpha, based on what i know, but some don't i guess.
Some people are unwilling to learn but that's fine, up to each own. RSI have to make money somehow, haven't they...?
When you 5 years down the road still have to deliver the functionality you estimated to 1½ years, then yeah, you have a management problem.
But honestly I do not really see it as a problem anymore. They have a devoted following that are ready to pay for that lost time and even sees it a project strength. When that is the situation, why hell should you really worry about optimizing the process? It is a dream position to be in. You can squander all the cash away doing R&D and research and noone holding you accountable. No need for management then.
Shit, who would not want to work like that? All the time in the world and no accountability. I hope Roberts is counting his blessings each night. He is in a pretty unique situation in the history of gaming.
But that does not change the fact that the guy has fuck all management skill.
I don't think that is a management problem, it's a management call for the benefit of the overall project that could only be made mid way as funding became more secure. A call that could possibly not be made in the usual process of a project this large already underway. Certainly a benefit stemming from from the crowdfunded model and lack of investors from CIG's PoV. Not that there hasn't been delay and possible mismanagement here and there, just like any large project I ever worked on.
I don't really think it is right to be calling this method or that method bad at this point. It is probably better to wait until the project is out the door before over analysing the pro's and con's to what imo is the most interesting development process surrounding gaming that I can remember.
Edit: Also, I would like to say that CR is bound to feel a large amount of pressure and is beholden to his backers to some degree. If the base ever turned on him it probably would have been all over. I am sure 3.0 being rolled out is a massive relief to all at CIG.
still not seeing it. in fact, going by the patch notes they have included a lot more than they promoted, and they claim that those are not full patch notes for live version.
3.0 was supposed to see additions to the already available Stanton System, if Vrika's post is any indication. It, instead, is the introduction of a small portion of the system.
Your post about including a lot more than was promoted stinks of white-knight deflection of the highest order.
The celestial bodies released for exploration are procedurally generated? Do I understand that part correctly?
From what I can see
Crusader is the gas giant below the current exploreable space station port olisar - missing ability to fly into gas
Hurston - fauna tech.
ArcCorp - city modules.
Microtech - bio domes / farming
That is what is missing? while disappointing, I struggle to get behind the notion that this is equal to loads of stuff missing when you examine the systems and tech that is being introduced with 3.0. This missing tech is being worked on though and slated for later inclusion to 3.x right?
just 2 more steps before non-bug reporting backers get their hands on 3.0 and my hat goes off to those willing to play the buggiest builds and give feedback, you are making all of our experiences better, so keep up the great work.
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!"
For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
they call it procedurally assisted. procedural generation to some degree but with over sight of the artists so it does not look terrible, with many procedural Points of interest acting the same way, procedural generation but with hand crafted oversight.
That's the biggest thing missing for me in the pre 3.0 builds. The ability to fly around the various areas and trade goods, generating money.
Also, can you exchange in-game money for ships, or is that not yet possible?