I realize that someone who has the ideas needed to build a perfect MMO probably already understands such things so there is hardly a need for me to explain them to you, but when things are not buggy, you don't take them to a special NDA group to test them. You don't even release them to an alpha or beta version of the game. When your game is bug free you publish it to the public and call it a full release. Or if you've ever been in on the launch day of pretty much any MMO you would know they aren't even bug free then.
So yeah, I'm sure any footage coming from the Evocati is fairly rough. It it wasn't, it would be in our hands right now. Not leaked videos, the playable version of 3.0. The reason the even have NDA videos is because of little snot noses who can't figure out that the pre-release of a pre-release is going to be a bit buggy and try to compare it to released titles that were just as buggy at that stage of development.
Not very credible. Besides the vast majority of people who get refunds probably don't even know the sub exists. Though I expect there's an even vaster majority of people who don't think they can get refunds.
How credible do you consider the posts on the "refund" reddit ?
Have fun
Some I would view as credible, others I would view as just trying to stir the pot but that applies for everywhere, ie I've seen /r/ds loonies say they have made false refund claims in that subreddit in an effort to discredit them....
The reason the even have NDA videos is because of little snot noses who can't figure out that the pre-release of a pre-release is going to be a bit buggy and try to compare it to released titles that were just as buggy at that stage of development.
Ironically, the reason they implemented the evocatis is because there was so much whinging from star citizen backers about how buggy the builds were, how often the game was crashing and how much they were having to download....
The reason the even have NDA videos is because of little snot noses who can't figure out that the pre-release of a pre-release is going to be a bit buggy and try to compare it to released titles that were just as buggy at that stage of development.
Ironically, the reason they implemented the evocatis is because there was so much whinging from star citizen backers about how buggy the builds were, how often the game was crashing and how much they were having to download....
I don't see the irony, you just repeated what he said? these people seem to be really thick, I can't think of a better way to describe the situation. First they 'play' on a pre alpha without any consideration of what an alpha access is primarily for and what it will most likely be like and then proceed to complain it is buggy and unstable. In response CGI made the PTU server seperate to the PU server so they would have a place to put the buggy 'first try' builds and the more stable builds and what did everyone do? Thats right they all download the PTU builds as soon as available and proceed to complain how terribly buggy and unstable the builds were on the PTU and that is what has lead to Evocati testing to prevent the really quite stupid people from harming themselves.
If anyone hopes to ever emulate this type of development, there must have been a lot learned from the many failed attempts from CGI in creating their 'module' release approach. Something I don't think they have gotten right yet to this day, hoping 3.0 will be better.
The reason the even have NDA videos is because of little snot noses who can't figure out that the pre-release of a pre-release is going to be a bit buggy and try to compare it to released titles that were just as buggy at that stage of development.
Ironically, the reason they implemented the evocatis is because there was so much whinging from star citizen backers about how buggy the builds were, how often the game was crashing and how much they were having to download....
I don't see the irony, you just repeated what he said? these people seem to be really thick, I can't think of a better way to describe the situation. First they 'play' on a pre alpha without any consideration of what an alpha access is primarily for and what it will most likely be like and then proceed to complain it is buggy and unstable. In response CGI made the PTU server seperate to the PU server so they would have a place to put the buggy 'first try' builds and the more stable builds and what did everyone do? Thats right they all download the PTU builds as soon as available and proceed to complain how terribly buggy and unstable the builds were on the PTU and that is what has lead to Evocati testing to prevent the really quite stupid people from harming themselves.
If anyone hopes to ever emulate this type of development, there must have been a lot learned from the many failed attempts from CGI in creating their 'module' release approach. Something I don't think they have gotten right yet to this day, hoping 3.0 will be better.
If you were to say something about the state of the alpha all these so-called "snot-nosed kids" as Eldurian likes to call them would cry "It's an alphaaaaaa" but they themselves are excluded from testing because CIG don't think they are mature enough to handle the bugginess of the alpha. Therein lies the irony.
If you were to say something about the state of the alpha all these so-called "snot-nosed kids" as Eldurian likes to call them would cry "It's an alphaaaaaa" but they themselves are excluded from testing because CIG don't think they are mature enough to handle the bugginess of the alpha. Therein lies the irony.
They are not excluded. They will have many months to playtest and bughunt themselves.
Ironically, the reason they implemented the evocatis is because there was so much whinging from star citizen backers about how buggy the builds were, how often the game was crashing and how much they were having to download....
The reason the even have NDA videos is because of little snot noses who can't figure out that the pre-release of a pre-release is going to be a bit buggy and try to compare it to released titles that were just as buggy at that stage of development.
Ironically, the reason they implemented the evocatis is because there was so much whinging from star citizen backers about how buggy the builds were, how often the game was crashing and how much they were having to download....
I don't see the irony, you just repeated what he said? these people seem to be really thick, I can't think of a better way to describe the situation. First they 'play' on a pre alpha without any consideration of what an alpha access is primarily for and what it will most likely be like and then proceed to complain it is buggy and unstable. In response CGI made the PTU server seperate to the PU server so they would have a place to put the buggy 'first try' builds and the more stable builds and what did everyone do? Thats right they all download the PTU builds as soon as available and proceed to complain how terribly buggy and unstable the builds were on the PTU and that is what has lead to Evocati testing to prevent the really quite stupid people from harming themselves.
If anyone hopes to ever emulate this type of development, there must have been a lot learned from the many failed attempts from CGI in creating their 'module' release approach. Something I don't think they have gotten right yet to this day, hoping 3.0 will be better.
If you were to say something about the state of the alpha all these so-called "snot-nosed kids" as Eldurian likes to call them would cry "It's an alphaaaaaa" but they themselves are excluded from testing because CIG don't think they are mature enough to handle the bugginess of the alpha. Therein lies the irony.
I don't think the people pointing out it is an alpha are the snot nosed kids? they tried to separate them with the ptu option, didnt work so they had to be more selective, hence evocati, 800 hand picked none snot nosed, thats a lot of snot picking.
I don't think the people pointing out it is an alpha are the snot nosed kids? they tried to separate them with the ptu option, didnt work so they had to be more selective, hence evocati, 800 hand picked none snot nosed, thats a lot of snot picking.
Why is it every video ever shown at every convention they set up at goes 99% flawlessly? Then about a year later it FINALLY gets SOME of the stuff added to the super secret test server and it runs like complete crap?
One would (logically) expect those things (they showed a year ago) that ran nearly flawlessly (maybe a small glitch here or there) to run AT LEAST as well now as they dd then. But they dont and never have. What logical conclusion can someone take away from the actual gameplay and the movies they show at the conventions?
Why is it the 'insiders' who got 'hands on' all 'report' that 3.0 (last Sept and Oct at the conventions) was 'groundbreaking' and 'orgasm worthy'?
There are how many videos from last summer and fall with (alleged) 3.0 'gameplay'? A half dozen? 10? 15? How many hours do those accumulate up to? 15? 20? 25? In ALL those videos how many major bugs are shown? Yet we have a guy who literally logged in and played for a total of 5 minutes make a half dozen videos with how many bugs and glitches?
You all use these convention movies that are not game play footage as 'evidence' just like you use dreams and outlines as stuff they already have ready to go. Its laughable.
Then when the minute spectrum of things they do actually have comes out and is not even playable you pull the 'people dont understand bugs' nonsense. No why would they when they have hours of convention footage of supposed gameplay with nary a flicker let alone game breaking bugs.
The logical disconnect and cognitive dishonesty is astounding.
Time and time again they have chosen hype over reality, there has never been a single time that I recall where they actually shot straight about something. Other than when they just completely stop talking about it for awhile then shelf it. But even then they dont tell the truth they just say theyre working on more imminent additions. Which time and time again fail to deliver.
I wrote it last summer when they (supposedly)went all in on SQ 42. They even made that statement, that SQ 42 was THE focus. Since then its been complete crickets. But again the tactic was to simply ignore. No explanation as to the complete 90 degree turn they took. But it was soon all about 3.0 hype. So here we are a year later No SQ 42, and 3.0 a disaster (from what we have seen and not seen). Here is the link if people want some awesome comments and perspective from the usual suspect of cheerleaders feel free to read that entire thread, definitely the first couple pages: http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/456005/sq42-to-be-released-later-this-year/p1
But not too long after this all went down they announced the lumberyard 'merger' and how they had been working on that (in secret in the most open development ever) for about a year. And in relation to that 2.6 was released (when 3.0 was supposed to be going to PTU) and SM was added. All of which quelled the doom for maybe two weeks. Because SM was a joke, and 2.6 caused more problems than it addressed. But it was still business as usual and it was on to 3.0. But if peopel want MORe eye openers and what Lumberyard meant (according to everyone on SC payroll) go reread all the claims made about how much faster things would happen or how much easier updating would be or how all the 'structural' 'fixes' were now (then) taken care of. Mind you thats all nearly 1 year ago now.
Its always fun going back and seeing the comments about this game and where the most 'prophetic' 'guesses' come from and where the most incorrect ones come from. But really not a surprise its only been 5 or 6 years not enough time for people to figure out that everything gets delayed and the more things get delayed the longer it takes to catch up.
Interesting that you did NOT add THIS clarification from Michael Graf too:
Richtig, das war ein Irrtum. Ich habe mir die Aufzeichnung des
Interviews danach noch mal angehört, und Chris sprach von 2017. Während
der Messe hört man so viel, da habe ich mich leider vertan.
Entschuldigung dafür!
You are right, that was a mistake. I have watched the recording of
the interview again (his conversation with Chris Roberts during
Gamescom), and Chris talked about 2017. You hear that much during
Gamescon, I've just mixed things up. Sorry about that!
He is clarifying that Chris Roberts did not mention late 2016 as possible release date during that conversation, but 2017.
yes rodarin, we all think the concept tech demos they stitch together to show how they want the game to be is the final fully fleshed out product waiting to be shipped out the door bug free. you opened my eyes, its all a 'ponzi scheme', there is no spoon.
I don't think anyone who followed SC closely was expecting sq42 at that time, nor was the OP to that thread, it was only created to point at earlier hopes of sq42 being out near that time would not be met so others could jump in to say 'look there is no spoon'. I even read in that thread that a SC fan was hoping that it damn well wouldn't be out at that time and should be at least a year away. I guess we all see what we want to see.
yes rodarin, we all think the concept tech demos they stitch together to show how they want the game to be is the final fully fleshed out product waiting to be shipped out the door bug free. you opened my eyes, its all a 'ponzi scheme', there is no spoon.
I don't think anyone who followed SC closely was expecting sq42 at that time, nor was the OP to that thread, it was only created to point at earlier hopes of sq42 being out near that time would not be met so others could jump in to say 'look there is no spoon'. I even read in that thread that a SC fan was hoping that it damn well wouldn't be out at that time and should be at least a year away. I guess we all see what we want to see.
I like roses.
it is when they sit there and claim theyre 'playing the game'. But at least yoy admit those ARE NOT gameplay videos theyre showing....
And there are 10 weeks left in 2017 what is the likelihood EITHER SQ 42 will be out (Pretty sure the talk was RETAIL release not public testing) OR 3.0 (on the PTU) before the turn into 2018?
I would say zero (obviously for the first one) and 50% (because I suspect they will put SOMETHING on the PTU and call it 3.0 so I would lose by semantics).
But now its really about whatever they show to the guys in Germany next week or whenever it is.
Because what ever that is will undoubtedly be crafted to take the focus on anything that is supposed to be imminently 'released' for backers to get their hands on.
3.0 is already on the PTU. I personally wouldn't expect to see sq42 until at least sometime between 3.3 or 3.4 at the earliest as they won't want to duplicate work. For instance in sq42 there will be missions going to planets, it would have been pointless making a fake planet and a level area just for sq42 if they needed to make that same planet a procedural assisted planet for SC anyway. Anywhere work might be duplicated it will be avoided if possible.
As we discussed many times before .. i do not brush off these interviews. I point out that what you call a quote from Ortwin or Chris are in fact the words of the author of the article, NOT direct quotes from Ortwin or Chris. And some of these authors misinterpret things. As can be shown with a fact check. Which some of them did not do.
And Chris PERSONALLY has worked on the SC project for a long time. No doubt about that. Most likely ever since the end of the Freelancer project. But WITH A TEAM he worked on it since April 2012. NOT 2011.
But you already knew that.
This discussion is like a broken record ... always repeats itself.
Have fun
Which is more likely
1. Several interviewers ask questions of Chris and Ortwin and ALL of them get the year wrong
or
2. CIG has a misleading date on their website
Funny how a company supposedly founding in 2012 registered its website on Oct 2011
A simple whois search shows this.
I am still baffled why you fight this issue so strongly. What is the big deal if they started work in 2011 or 2012? We both know this game wont be close to containing half the features advertised until after 2020. It really doesnt matter to me, I just bring this up because it seems to hit a nerve with you hence you using caps in your post.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
Comments
So yeah, I'm sure any footage coming from the Evocati is fairly rough. It it wasn't, it would be in our hands right now. Not leaked videos, the playable version of 3.0. The reason the even have NDA videos is because of little snot noses who can't figure out that the pre-release of a pre-release is going to be a bit buggy and try to compare it to released titles that were just as buggy at that stage of development.
How credible do you consider the posts on the "refund" reddit ?
Have fun
Besides the vast majority of people who get refunds probably don't even know the sub exists.
Though I expect there's an even vaster majority of people who don't think they can get refunds.
..Cake..
Some I would view as credible, others I would view as just trying to stir the pot but that applies for everywhere, ie I've seen /r/ds loonies say they have made false refund claims in that subreddit in an effort to discredit them....
Ironically, the reason they implemented the evocatis is because there was so much whinging from star citizen backers about how buggy the builds were, how often the game was crashing and how much they were having to download....
If anyone hopes to ever emulate this type of development, there must have been a lot learned from the many failed attempts from CGI in creating their 'module' release approach. Something I don't think they have gotten right yet to this day, hoping 3.0 will be better.
If you were to say something about the state of the alpha all these so-called "snot-nosed kids" as Eldurian likes to call them would cry "It's an alphaaaaaa" but they themselves are excluded from testing because CIG don't think they are mature enough to handle the bugginess of the alpha. Therein lies the irony.
How long was Alpha 2 available to the backers ?
Have fun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=ZVLJFgAyd_Y
Have fun
Have fun
One would (logically) expect those things (they showed a year ago) that ran nearly flawlessly (maybe a small glitch here or there) to run AT LEAST as well now as they dd then. But they dont and never have. What logical conclusion can someone take away from the actual gameplay and the movies they show at the conventions?
Why is it the 'insiders' who got 'hands on' all 'report' that 3.0 (last Sept and Oct at the conventions) was 'groundbreaking' and 'orgasm worthy'?
There are how many videos from last summer and fall with (alleged) 3.0 'gameplay'? A half dozen? 10? 15? How many hours do those accumulate up to? 15? 20? 25? In ALL those videos how many major bugs are shown? Yet we have a guy who literally logged in and played for a total of 5 minutes make a half dozen videos with how many bugs and glitches?
You all use these convention movies that are not game play footage as 'evidence' just like you use dreams and outlines as stuff they already have ready to go. Its laughable.
Then when the minute spectrum of things they do actually have comes out and is not even playable you pull the 'people dont understand bugs' nonsense. No why would they when they have hours of convention footage of supposed gameplay with nary a flicker let alone game breaking bugs.
The logical disconnect and cognitive dishonesty is astounding.
Time and time again they have chosen hype over reality, there has never been a single time that I recall where they actually shot straight about something. Other than when they just completely stop talking about it for awhile then shelf it. But even then they dont tell the truth they just say theyre working on more imminent additions. Which time and time again fail to deliver.
I wrote it last summer when they (supposedly)went all in on SQ 42. They even made that statement, that SQ 42 was THE focus. Since then its been complete crickets. But again the tactic was to simply ignore. No explanation as to the complete 90 degree turn they took. But it was soon all about 3.0 hype. So here we are a year later No SQ 42, and 3.0 a disaster (from what we have seen and not seen). Here is the link if people want some awesome comments and perspective from the usual suspect of cheerleaders feel free to read that entire thread, definitely the first couple pages:
http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/456005/sq42-to-be-released-later-this-year/p1
here is a link to the direct Chris Roberts comments:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/50z7op/michael_graf_gamestar_chief_editor_info_about/
But not too long after this all went down they announced the lumberyard 'merger' and how they had been working on that (in secret in the most open development ever) for about a year. And in relation to that 2.6 was released (when 3.0 was supposed to be going to PTU) and SM was added. All of which quelled the doom for maybe two weeks. Because SM was a joke, and 2.6 caused more problems than it addressed. But it was still business as usual and it was on to 3.0. But if peopel want MORe eye openers and what Lumberyard meant (according to everyone on SC payroll) go reread all the claims made about how much faster things would happen or how much easier updating would be or how all the 'structural' 'fixes' were now (then) taken care of. Mind you thats all nearly 1 year ago now.
Its always fun going back and seeing the comments about this game and where the most 'prophetic' 'guesses' come from and where the most incorrect ones come from. But really not a surprise its only been 5 or 6 years not enough time for people to figure out that everything gets delayed and the more things get delayed the longer it takes to catch up.
He is clarifying that Chris Roberts did not mention late 2016 as possible release date during that conversation, but 2017.
Have fun
I don't think anyone who followed SC closely was expecting sq42 at that time, nor was the OP to that thread, it was only created to point at earlier hopes of sq42 being out near that time would not be met so others could jump in to say 'look there is no spoon'. I even read in that thread that a SC fan was hoping that it damn well wouldn't be out at that time and should be at least a year away. I guess we all see what we want to see.
I like roses.
I would say zero (obviously for the first one) and 50% (because I suspect they will put SOMETHING on the PTU and call it 3.0 so I would lose by semantics).
But now its really about whatever they show to the guys in Germany next week or whenever it is.
Because what ever that is will undoubtedly be crafted to take the focus on anything that is supposed to be imminently 'released' for backers to get their hands on.
Have fun
"...CitizenCon 2947 will be held on Friday 27th October at Capitol Theater in Frankfurt: Kaiserstraße 106, 63065 Offenbach am Main. ..."
Have fun
If people PAID for FULL GAME, and ppl didnt get full game how ppl cant do refund?
So, otherwords, make some idea, publish it to kickstarter, wait 30 days after kickstarter is over and thats it? They got money and we got what?
Have fun
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Not bad !
That would be over 10 million lightyears 8-O (10.570.008.340 LY)
Cool ... i was not aware that we will be able to explore 101 galaxies, up to and including "Mirach's Ghost" (NGC 404) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_galaxies
Have fun
1. Several interviewers ask questions of Chris and Ortwin and ALL of them get the year wrong
or
2. CIG has a misleading date on their website
Funny how a company supposedly founding in 2012 registered its website on Oct 2011
A simple whois search shows this.
I am still baffled why you fight this issue so strongly. What is the big deal if they started work in 2011 or 2012? We both know this game wont be close to containing half the features advertised until after 2020. It really doesnt matter to me, I just bring this up because it seems to hit a nerve with you hence you using caps in your post.