This is copied from the main site and pretty much expresses my feelings about the matter.
Why "Complainers" are important in development.
Discussion
Today at 08:47 pm
Recently, I found myself reading a thread that focused on the development process of Star Citizen. The author was arguing that it was wrong, even hurtful, for people to have criticism or concerns about the development process at Cloud Imperium Games. After all, the author argued, "great things need time to come together." Development doesn't happen overnight, something he argued most of the community didn't understand.
What the author fails to understand is that most people don't have an issue with the time it takes to develop a game. The problem the community has with CIG is that they have consistently misled, misinformed, and exaggerated facts about the game. As a business owner/operator, there is no way that I could expect respect from customers if I hadn't delivered on a promise/product deadline I had made earlier. While I understand that development has unplanned bumps, and that schedules change, CIG seemingly ignores changed dates and doesn't relay them properly to the community. Why was it delayed? What is being done to improve the issue? How can we help? Such communication would go along way to restore "complainers" faith in CIG.
For those who say I am being idiotic or stupid, look at the following facts. We were told we would see Squadron 42 gameplay, Star Citizen developments come at a quicker pace, and improved stability for the last year and a half. Since they were looking at the code and state of the game behind closed doors, most, including myself, believed them. Yet those features didn't come until this December. Ships that were introduced three years ago still haven't left concept stages, and some that have are seemingly incomplete. We were misled about a launch date at Citizencon two years in a row. Stability is still in shambles, and I would argue, is sometimes so bad it's hard to truly test the game.
In conclusion, I would like relay this quote from James Baldwin I heard in High School, "I love America more than any other country in this world; and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually". This can be applied to Star Citizen. I love SC more than any other game, and for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually. Most "complainers" don't come to Spectrum looking to complain or fight about something. They are trying to help. They have been let down by seemingly dishonest business practices. The majority of these people understand a game take time to develop, and are only looking to help.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The last game this industry vet worked on before this one was released in 2003, industry fossil is more like it. But I guess someone like Lord Brittish is a vet too and knows better?
The industry had changed and the mmo vets are having a harder time keeping up then the armchair developers. Just look at the struggle Mark Jacobs and Todd Coleman are going through for instance.
I like how Chris Roberts thinks, he dreams big, bigger then everybody else. And heck, we need someone like that to push boundaries. I do NOT like the way he presents it to the public, he sells these dreams like they are a reality, everything and the kitchen sink. He misses deadlines while adding more and more stuff, he burns through money with not an end in sight for anything. So far I see overpromised and underdelivered, time will tell.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Post edited by lahnmir on
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Please do explain how it's rendered meaningless by context, because it sure looks like a qualified estimate to me. Also, what is the new estimate, please?
Prepare to lose your narrative again in the war of FACTS v FAKE NEWS!
Bing Bing Bong Bong.
Is your link supposed to prove something? All I see are three pages of posts heavily geared toward one-upmanship and trending toward slap-fights; thick on rhetoric, light on evidence. It's basically just a rehash of your tactics in this thread here.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Anything else is revisionist history. Do you really want me to go digging up those links?
Yes please do.
Its always fun when people post isolated quotes/links without context as "proof", ignoring all other quotes and links and developments in a project history that would show why the Star Citizen project is going the way it is now.
Like this one: >>> and stated that he would need 20 million including outside investment to complete his vision. >>>> A statement made BEFORE the overwhelming success of the crowdfunding campaign and the MASSIVE change in scope and project size. Of course @Phaserlight knows that the number given refers to the OLD much smaller project. But he does not mention it, because that would ruin his narrative.
Have fun
I'm really not sure you can make the claim that there has been a "MASSIVE change in scope" (increase) since $20 million was enough to cover everything. If anything, hasn't the scope decreased in size somewhat? Fewer star systems and planets at launch, minimum viable product, etc.
Weren't they always planning to have a game where you could move around inside your spaceship and land on planets in a persistent online world (with a single player component)? How is what they are doing today MASSIVELY bigger than that other than budget and some quality of life items?
My personal belief is that Chris has been making the same game since 2011: the one he has always wanted to make. What's changed is the way CIG is selling it. It's fundamentally no different, and is not massively bigger in scope on the things that matter.
You asked for links.
In this letter from the chairman Chris references "the goal of achieving $20M in development funding" (emphasis mine - this is not just another stretch goal):
The following GameRant article states Star Citizen "hit its $20 million goal. That heap of dough is enough to fully cover Star Citizen’s expected budget":
In the following New York Times article, Chris is quoted:
"'My expectation was that we’d raise around $4 million' said Chris Roberts, 48, the founder of Cloud Imperium Games. 'I had investors lined up to help with the rest but Sandy, my wife, told me not to worry about investors — that we’d make it to $20 million.'"
In the same article it mentions that Chris founded Cloud Imperium Games in 2011.
In the following interview with The Mittani dated October 19, 2012 Chris states:
"Basically I’ve been working with a small team over the course of the past year to get the early prototyping and production done. The team has varied in scale from just me, essentially, to about 10 people."
It doesn't seem like stating that Star Citizen has been in development for 7 years and has overrun its initial projected cost eightfold is stretching the facts.
If you have an updated estimate for the total cost of development for Star Citizen feel free to refute the above by linking to it. "Infinite money" is not a valid answer.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
All I can say is I backed this very early on in the kickstarter campaign and was more than a little upset at getting a constant stream of ads spammed to my inbox to buy more ships while giving very little in the way of content updates ever since. Not to mention it's like years overdue.
Pleaso go and check how many kickstarted mmorpgs have "released" on the "promised" date.
Whille your at it check how many are being done with a single player campaign in the mix.
Pointing out the failures of all others doesn't elevate SC in any way, just makes them look no better than the rest.
Perhaps even in a worse light as most of those other titles struggle from underfunding, clearly not a claim CI can hide behind.
So setting aside previous missed deadlines, where are the new revised dates for 3.0, the single player game and MVP release dates?
You seem like a reasonable person, so how long are you willing to wait for these releases, or at least a promise date for any of them?
Are you truly willing to wait indefinitely?
I'm not singling out CI btw, my patience with MJ on CU actually fuels my anmoyance more.
I'm a bit tired of developers, indie or mainstream going dark on delivery dates, especially after many years of working on them yet they won't provide target dates for near term beta or alphas even.
Crowfall devs did it better, they were promising some form of early release by the end of 2017, then when it could not be met revised it to as early in 2018 as possible.
Also, after receiving $6M in additional funding recently, they shared what it would be used for and included marketing, something I rarely hear indie devs acknowledge or account for.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Please do explain how it's rendered meaningless by context, because it sure looks like a qualified estimate to me. Also, what is the new estimate, please?
Prepare to lose your narrative again in the war of FACTS v FAKE NEWS!
Bing Bing Bong Bong.
Is your link supposed to prove something? All I see are three pages of posts heavily geared toward one-upmanship and trending toward slap-fights; thick on rhetoric, light on evidence. It's basically just a rehash of your tactics in this thread here.
Really? because I hardly posted much in that thread, but i figured the bit where i pointed out that people want to believe that CR spent over a million of his own money on a kickstarter video and a web page pretty funny. Just for clarity, that is your position xD.
Oh btw, about the insults towards my person, I'm just a mirror.
Anything else is revisionist history. Do you really want me to go digging up those links?
Yes please do.
Its always fun when people post isolated quotes/links without context as "proof", ignoring all other quotes and links and developments in a project history that would show why the Star Citizen project is going the way it is now.
Like this one: >>> and stated that he would need 20 million including outside investment to complete his vision. >>>> A statement made BEFORE the overwhelming success of the crowdfunding campaign and the MASSIVE change in scope and project size. Of course @Phaserlight knows that the number given refers to the OLD much smaller project. But he does not mention it, because that would ruin his narrative.
Have fun
I'm really not sure you can make the claim that there has been a "MASSIVE change in scope" (increase) since $20 million was enough to cover everything. If anything, hasn't the scope decreased in size somewhat? Fewer star systems and planets at launch, minimum viable product, etc.
Weren't they always planning to have a game where you could move around inside your spaceship and land on planets in a persistent online world (with a single player component)? How is what they are doing today MASSIVELY bigger than that other than budget and some quality of life items?
My personal belief is that Chris has been making the same game since 2011: the one he has always wanted to make. What's changed is the way CIG is selling it. It's fundamentally no different, and is not massively bigger in scope on the things that matter.
You asked for links.
In this letter from the chairman Chris references "the goal of achieving $20M in development funding" (emphasis mine - this is not just another stretch goal):
The following GameRant article states Star Citizen "hit its $20 million goal. That heap of dough is enough to fully cover Star Citizen’s expected budget":
In the following New York Times article, Chris is quoted:
"'My expectation was that we’d raise around $4 million' said Chris Roberts, 48, the founder of Cloud Imperium Games. 'I had investors lined up to help with the rest but Sandy, my wife, told me not to worry about investors — that we’d make it to $20 million.'"
In the same article it mentions that Chris founded Cloud Imperium Games in 2011.
In the following interview with The Mittani dated October 19, 2012 Chris states:
"Basically I’ve been working with a small team over the course of the past year to get the early prototyping and production done. The team has varied in scale from just me, essentially, to about 10 people."
It doesn't seem like stating that Star Citizen has been in development for 7 years and has overrun its initial projected cost eightfold is stretching the facts.
If you have an updated estimate for the total cost of development for Star Citizen feel free to refute the above by linking to it. "Infinite money" is not a valid answer.
Such a joke, even your own quotes show you that it was 5 years with Chirs working mostly on his own prior to that. Then ignore all that and state 7 years! CIG just celebrated their 5th birthday? ignore!
WAS SEVEN YEARS I TELL YA LOOK AT THIS OBSCURE QUOTE LOOK LOOK! and for what? all so you can make some ridiculous narrative of 'omg look how long its taken he is a BAD man Chris is a BAD MAN mkay!' it is honestly Pathetic to ignore your own evidence to continue that sham.
And your 'being able to fully explore 100's of planets in solar systems with gravity, orbits and revolutions in a fully simulated universe is SMALLER in scope than loading into small areas with boundaries, cut scenes, invisible walls and sky boxes everywhere we go!' narrative? haha. Who are you trying to sell that to?
So setting aside previous missed deadlines, where are the new revised dates for 3.0, the single player game and MVP release dates?
You seem like a reasonable person, so how long are you willing to wait for these releases, or at least a promise date for any of them?
I would think that if they reach beta in 18 months to 2 years years from now that would be reasonable. I would think SQ42 would be ready around the same time or not long after due to how the 2 developments are interlinked.
I don't need CIG to promise and crystal ball anything. I can follow their progress, I can see what they have achieved. When CIG start to fall out of anything that you could consider normal development progress then I will worry. So far it is 5 years to get here, in 2 years time it will be 7 years to reach beta for 2x AAA games of this scope, in my realm that is nothing short of pretty damn awesome. If it takes another year or two after that for mvp? I can live with that just fine.
SQ42 is about to be shown on holiday live stream in 9 days. Can't wait. If it turns out they have nothing to show and cancel it, well then I think that would qualify as having fallen out of the acceptable range and I would probably cancel my support unless it was shown within a few weeks of that time. I am not expecting them to cancel, you?
Yeah also check how many of those have 170mil of crowdfunded cash, 500+ devs and no release date.
Why so willing to showcase ignorance?
You really think that problems get solved just by adding more people and money to the mix lol? Obligatory Brook's Law reference with the "9 woman's can't make a baby in one month"...
Pleaso go and check how many kickstarted mmorpgs have "released" on the "promised" date.
Whille your at it check how many are being done with a single player campaign in the mix.
Pointing out the failures of all others doesn't elevate SC in any way, just makes them look no better than the rest.
Perhaps even in a worse light as most of those other titles struggle from underfunding, clearly not a claim CI can hide behind.
So
setting aside previous missed deadlines, where are the new revised
dates for 3.0, the single player game and MVP release dates?
You
seem like a reasonable person, so how long are you willing to wait for
these releases, or at least a promise date for any of them?
Are you truly willing to wait indefinitely?
I'm not singling out CI btw, my patience with MJ on CU actually fuels my anmoyance more.
I'm
a bit tired of developers, indie or mainstream going dark on delivery
dates, especially after many years of working on them yet they won't
provide target dates for near term beta or alphas even.
Crowfall
devs did it better, they were promising some form of early release by
the end of 2017, then when it could not be met revised it to as early in
2018 as possible.
Also, after receiving $6M in additional
funding recently, they shared what it would be used for and included
marketing, something I rarely hear indie devs acknowledge or account
for.
What failures? There's nothing of "failure" in missing a "kickstart" release date. It's the nature of the business, you can't predict these things, that's why games are usually only announced near the end of the development cycle. Things change all the time and it's impossible to predict delivery dates, the only reason kickstart games add them in their campaign is because it's mandatory. All they want to is really get the ball going and the rest is "will see how it manages".
Anyone taking dates or features as promises is as dumb as naive lol
Waiting is part of it, doesn't matter if it's 1 day or 10 years. Crowdfunding is sponsoring ideas not buying stuff. If you want to buy stuff stick to traditional business.
Star Citizen crybaby's aren't special, they are the same species that cry foul in any other ambitious crowdfunded game: Crowfall, Camelot Unchained, KingdomCome Delverance, Ashes of Creation etc
All have their "concerners" who got into way over their heads. There's nothing wrong with any of these games development, it's business as possible, it's dumb people expectations that's wrong.
So it's up to them to cope with it. And for most the only way to cope with it is "make noise", mostly useless toxic gibberish to try and ease the pain (frustration). Won't work, might as well and move on to things you like or risk to be "damaged" forever lol
The reason crowdfunded devs need to provide dates is because they are taking money with almost no strings attached, so more transparency is demanded.
No one forced these developers to take money from the crowd. They did so knowingly. Any backlash they feel from backers getting impatient is warranted, because they chose to engage uneducated consumers directly for funding.
It's quite ironic that you would post on and on about how backers go into the deal with unrealistic expectations for devs, all the while making the case that devs shouldn't have expected this impatience when they eschewed using traditional publishers to fleece the crowd repeatedly using unrealistic and unachievable development timelines. Nobody forced them to give those dates; nothing but the pressure to get more money from the crowd pressured devs into giving unrealistic timelines. If that blows up in a dev's face, he has no one to blame but himself.
The reason crowdfunded devs need to provide dates is because they are taking money with almost no strings attached, so more transparency is demanded.
The transparency is clear with the availability to view (and even participate in this case) the progress. If progress is lacking and unacceptable then funding dries up and the project dies. What do you think dates would change?
The reason crowdfunded devs need to provide dates is because they are taking money with almost no strings attached, so more transparency is demanded.
The transparency is clear with the availability to view (and even participate in this case) the progress. If progress is lacking and unacceptable then funding dries up and the project dies. What do you think dates would change?
The reason crowdfunded devs need to provide dates is because they are taking money with almost no strings attached, so more transparency is demanded.
The transparency is clear with the availability to view (and even participate in this case) the progress. If progress is lacking and unacceptable then funding dries up and the project dies. What do you think dates would change?
Expectations.
You seem knowledgeable about projects of this nature, surely you understand that dates are subject to change wildly on large projects and happen frequently. Add hard dates and they are sure to slip. So what is it that people should expect?
It seems to me that the biggest beef around here is that no one is walking around the CIG offices with a big whip forcing them to push out some half finished generic crap while they all live on bread crumbs.
The reason crowdfunded devs need to provide dates is because they are taking money with almost no strings attached, so more transparency is demanded.
No one forced these developers to take money from the crowd. They did so knowingly. Any backlash they feel from backers getting impatient is warranted, because they chose to engage uneducated consumers directly for funding.
It's quite ironic that you would post on and on about how backers go into the deal with unrealistic expectations for devs, all the while making the case that devs shouldn't have expected this impatience when they eschewed using traditional publishers to fleece the crowd repeatedly using unrealistic and unachievable development timelines. Nobody forced them to give those dates; nothing but the pressure to get more money from the crowd pressured devs into giving unrealistic timelines. If that blows up in a dev's face, he has no one to blame but himself.
But nobody forced anyone to give money either.
That's the basic mistake. The crowdfunded campaign comes first and all the risk, effort and money spent launching it is not on the gamer's expenses. Then it's up to the gamer to evaluate the inherent risks of their decisions. The crowdfunding company did their part, it risked a LOT up front with no guarantees to get that time/money/effort back.
Now it's up to the gamer to decide if he wants to risk or not. They took the first step and now are asking if someone else to take the risk to joining them.
Nobody is forced to give money in advance so you can't expect anything but to lose your money.
If you are not willing to risk it stay away from crowdfunded projects. Simple. Crying won't make you more right. The thing is that the world is filled with naive and ignorant people who get themselves into stuff they don't fully understand and then have a miserable time coping with the disappointment. That is their own fault, ofc it's easier to blame other's instead of owning their mistake/ignorance.
Stop being crybabys because of video games and own it up, or you take the risk and live with it or you end up crying in the corners for eternity. Own your actions instead of blaming others for your faults.
The reason crowdfunded devs need to provide dates is because they are taking money with almost no strings attached, so more transparency is demanded.
The transparency is clear with the availability to view (and even participate in this case) the progress. If progress is lacking and unacceptable then funding dries up and the project dies. What do you think dates would change?
Expectations.
You seem knowledgeable about projects of this nature, surely you understand that dates are subject to change wildly on large projects and happen frequently. Add hard dates and they are sure to slip. So what is it that people should expect?
It seems to me that the biggest beef around here is that no one is walking around the CIG offices with a big whip forcing them to push out some half finished generic crap while they all live on bread crumbs.
Really? To my knowledge they are eating blue cake, selling virtual land and announcing endless delays.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Anything else is revisionist history. Do you really want me to go digging up those links?
Yes please do.
Its always fun when people post isolated quotes/links without context as "proof", ignoring all other quotes and links and developments in a project history that would show why the Star Citizen project is going the way it is now.
Like this one: >>> and stated that he would need 20 million including outside investment to complete his vision. >>>> A statement made BEFORE the overwhelming success of the crowdfunding campaign and the MASSIVE change in scope and project size. Of course @Phaserlight knows that the number given refers to the OLD much smaller project. But he does not mention it, because that would ruin his narrative.
Have fun
I'm really not sure you can make the claim that there has been a "MASSIVE change in scope" (increase) since $20 million was enough to cover everything. If anything, hasn't the scope decreased in size somewhat? Fewer star systems and planets at launch, minimum viable product, etc.
Weren't they always planning to have a game where you could move around inside your spaceship and land on planets in a persistent online world (with a single player component)? How is what they are doing today MASSIVELY bigger than that other than budget and some quality of life items?
My personal belief is that Chris has been making the same game since 2011: the one he has always wanted to make. What's changed is the way CIG is selling it. It's fundamentally no different, and is not massively bigger in scope on the things that matter.
You asked for links.
In this letter from the chairman Chris references "the goal of achieving $20M in development funding" (emphasis mine - this is not just another stretch goal):
The following GameRant article states Star Citizen "hit its $20 million goal. That heap of dough is enough to fully cover Star Citizen’s expected budget":
In the following New York Times article, Chris is quoted:
"'My expectation was that we’d raise around $4 million' said Chris Roberts, 48, the founder of Cloud Imperium Games. 'I had investors lined up to help with the rest but Sandy, my wife, told me not to worry about investors — that we’d make it to $20 million.'"
In the same article it mentions that Chris founded Cloud Imperium Games in 2011.
In the following interview with The Mittani dated October 19, 2012 Chris states:
"Basically I’ve been working with a small team over the course of the past year to get the early prototyping and production done. The team has varied in scale from just me, essentially, to about 10 people."
It doesn't seem like stating that Star Citizen has been in development for 7 years and has overrun its initial projected cost eightfold is stretching the facts.
If you have an updated estimate for the total cost of development for Star Citizen feel free to refute the above by linking to it. "Infinite money" is not a valid answer.
Such a joke, even your own quotes show you that it was 5 years with Chirs working mostly on his own prior to that. Then ignore all that and state 7 years! CIG just celebrated their 5th birthday? ignore!
WAS SEVEN YEARS I TELL YA LOOK AT THIS OBSCURE QUOTE LOOK LOOK! and for what? all so you can make some ridiculous narrative of 'omg look how long its taken he is a BAD man Chris is a BAD MAN mkay!' it is honestly Pathetic to ignore your own evidence to continue that sham.
And your 'being able to fully explore 100's of planets in solar systems with gravity, orbits and revolutions in a fully simulated universe is SMALLER in scope than loading into small areas with boundaries, cut scenes, invisible walls and sky boxes everywhere we go!' narrative? haha. Who are you trying to sell that to?
All right, so six years. Mea culpa. The exact date Chris began working on Star Citizen is less important to me than the budget overruns. However, he has been quoted multiple times saying work on Star Citizen began in 2011 and he founded his company CIG that year as well. It's not really an "obscure" quote. It seems to be a bigger issue to you than it is to me; I acknowledge I should have said 6, not 7.
I'm also not sure where you are getting "boundaries, cut scenes, invisible walls..."; I don't think that was ever a part of the Kickstarter pitch, but it may have been a factor of technical limitations they ran into along the way.
Isn't it a fact that the number of planets and star systems to be included at launch has been greatly reduced?
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
So setting aside previous missed deadlines, where are the new revised dates for 3.0, the single player game and MVP release dates?
You seem like a reasonable person, so how long are you willing to wait for these releases, or at least a promise date for any of them?
I would think that if they reach beta in 18 months to 2 years years from now that would be reasonable. I would think SQ42 would be ready around the same time or not long after due to how the 2 developments are interlinked.
I don't need CIG to promise and crystal ball anything. I can follow their progress, I can see what they have achieved. When CIG start to fall out of anything that you could consider normal development progress then I will worry. So far it is 5 years to get here, in 2 years time it will be 7 years to reach beta for 2x AAA games of this scope, in my realm that is nothing short of pretty damn awesome. If it takes another year or two after that for mvp? I can live with that just fine.
SQ42 is about to be shown on holiday live stream in 9 days. Can't wait. If it turns out they have nothing to show and cancel it, well then I think that would qualify as having fallen out of the acceptable range and I would probably cancel my support unless it was shown within a few weeks of that time. I am not expecting them to cancel, you?
No, not expecting them to cancel and hoping for signs SQ42 might fully release in 2 yrs or less as I feel 9 yrs a bit excessive for a single player title considering it was first promised in a much shorter time frame.
Yes, I know, its grown in ways far beyond the original vision but also remember some fans never asked for it to do so.
Also I feel releasing SQ42 will prove they can actually hit a target and finish something, which continues to be a valid point of debate until it occurs.
Besides, I need a good new space sim / game to play before I retire and 9 yrs will cut it way too close
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Comments
Why "Complainers" are important in development.
Recently, I found myself reading a thread that focused on the development process of Star Citizen. The author was arguing that it was wrong, even hurtful, for people to have criticism or concerns about the development process at Cloud Imperium Games. After all, the author argued, "great things need time to come together." Development doesn't happen overnight, something he argued most of the community didn't understand.
What the author fails to understand is that most people don't have an issue with the time it takes to develop a game. The problem the community has with CIG is that they have consistently misled, misinformed, and exaggerated facts about the game. As a business owner/operator, there is no way that I could expect respect from customers if I hadn't delivered on a promise/product deadline I had made earlier. While I understand that development has unplanned bumps, and that schedules change, CIG seemingly ignores changed dates and doesn't relay them properly to the community. Why was it delayed? What is being done to improve the issue? How can we help? Such communication would go along way to restore "complainers" faith in CIG.
For those who say I am being idiotic or stupid, look at the following facts. We were told we would see Squadron 42 gameplay, Star Citizen developments come at a quicker pace, and improved stability for the last year and a half. Since they were looking at the code and state of the game behind closed doors, most, including myself, believed them. Yet those features didn't come until this December. Ships that were introduced three years ago still haven't left concept stages, and some that have are seemingly incomplete. We were misled about a launch date at Citizencon two years in a row. Stability is still in shambles, and I would argue, is sometimes so bad it's hard to truly test the game.
In conclusion, I would like relay this quote from James Baldwin I heard in High School, "I love America more than any other country in this world; and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually". This can be applied to Star Citizen. I love SC more than any other game, and for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually. Most "complainers" don't come to Spectrum looking to complain or fight about something. They are trying to help. They have been let down by seemingly dishonest business practices. The majority of these people understand a game take time to develop, and are only looking to help.
Regards,
AFO Wolfpack
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/why-complainers-are-important-in-development
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
There you go: Understanding the Angry Gamer
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The industry had changed and the mmo vets are having a harder time keeping up then the armchair developers. Just look at the struggle Mark Jacobs and Todd Coleman are going through for instance.
I like how Chris Roberts thinks, he dreams big, bigger then everybody else. And heck, we need someone like that to push boundaries. I do NOT like the way he presents it to the public, he sells these dreams like they are a reality, everything and the kitchen sink. He misses deadlines while adding more and more stuff, he burns through money with not an end in sight for anything. So far I see overpromised and underdelivered, time will tell.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Weren't they always planning to have a game where you could move around inside your spaceship and land on planets in a persistent online world (with a single player component)? How is what they are doing today MASSIVELY bigger than that other than budget and some quality of life items?
My personal belief is that Chris has been making the same game since 2011: the one he has always wanted to make. What's changed is the way CIG is selling it. It's fundamentally no different, and is not massively bigger in scope on the things that matter.
You asked for links.
In this letter from the chairman Chris references "the goal of achieving $20M in development funding" (emphasis mine - this is not just another stretch goal):
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13266-Letter-From-The-Chairman-19-Million
The following GameRant article states Star Citizen "hit its $20 million goal. That heap of dough is enough to fully cover Star Citizen’s expected budget":
https://www.google.com/amp/s/gamerant.com/start-citizen-crowdfunding-25-million/amp/
In the following New York Times article, Chris is quoted:
"'My expectation was that we’d raise around $4 million' said Chris Roberts, 48, the founder of Cloud Imperium Games. 'I had investors lined up to help with the rest but Sandy, my wife, told me not to worry about investors — that we’d make it to $20 million.'"
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/technology/personaltech/video-game-raised-148-million-from-fans-now-its-raising-issues.html?referer=https://www.google.com/
In the same article it mentions that Chris founded Cloud Imperium Games in 2011.
In the following interview with The Mittani dated October 19, 2012 Chris states:
"Basically I’ve been working with a small team over the course of the past year to get the early prototyping and production done. The team has varied in scale from just me, essentially, to about 10 people."
https://web.archive.org/web/20170320041806/http://themittani.com/features/exclusive-interview-star-citizens-chris-roberts
It doesn't seem like stating that Star Citizen has been in development for 7 years and has overrun its initial projected cost eightfold is stretching the facts.
If you have an updated estimate for the total cost of development for Star Citizen feel free to refute the above by linking to it. "Infinite money" is not a valid answer.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Pleaso go and check how many kickstarted mmorpgs have "released" on the "promised" date.
Whille your at it check how many are being done with a single player campaign in the mix.
..Cake..
Perhaps even in a worse light as most of those other titles struggle from underfunding, clearly not a claim CI can hide behind.
So setting aside previous missed deadlines, where are the new revised dates for 3.0, the single player game and MVP release dates?
You seem like a reasonable person, so how long are you willing to wait for these releases, or at least a promise date for any of them?
Are you truly willing to wait indefinitely?
I'm not singling out CI btw, my patience with MJ on CU actually fuels my anmoyance more.
I'm a bit tired of developers, indie or mainstream going dark on delivery dates, especially after many years of working on them yet they won't provide target dates for near term beta or alphas even.
Crowfall devs did it better, they were promising some form of early release by the end of 2017, then when it could not be met revised it to as early in 2018 as possible.
Also, after receiving $6M in additional funding recently, they shared what it would be used for and included marketing, something I rarely hear indie devs acknowledge or account for.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Oh btw, about the insults towards my person, I'm just a mirror.
WAS SEVEN YEARS I TELL YA LOOK AT THIS OBSCURE QUOTE LOOK LOOK! and for what? all so you can make some ridiculous narrative of 'omg look how long its taken he is a BAD man Chris is a BAD MAN mkay!' it is honestly Pathetic to ignore your own evidence to continue that sham.
And your 'being able to fully explore 100's of planets in solar systems with gravity, orbits and revolutions in a fully simulated universe is SMALLER in scope than loading into small areas with boundaries, cut scenes, invisible walls and sky boxes everywhere we go!' narrative? haha. Who are you trying to sell that to?
I don't need CIG to promise and crystal ball anything. I can follow their progress, I can see what they have achieved. When CIG start to fall out of anything that you could consider normal development progress then I will worry. So far it is 5 years to get here, in 2 years time it will be 7 years to reach beta for 2x AAA games of this scope, in my realm that is nothing short of pretty damn awesome. If it takes another year or two after that for mvp? I can live with that just fine.
SQ42 is about to be shown on holiday live stream in 9 days. Can't wait. If it turns out they have nothing to show and cancel it, well then I think that would qualify as having fallen out of the acceptable range and I would probably cancel my support unless it was shown within a few weeks of that time. I am not expecting them to cancel, you?
You really think that problems get solved just by adding more people and money to the mix lol?
Obligatory Brook's Law reference with the "9 woman's can't make a baby in one month"...
What failures? There's nothing of "failure" in missing a "kickstart" release date. It's the nature of the business, you can't predict these things, that's why games are usually only announced near the end of the development cycle. Things change all the time and it's impossible to predict delivery dates, the only reason kickstart games add them in their campaign is because it's mandatory. All they want to is really get the ball going and the rest is "will see how it manages".
Anyone taking dates or features as promises is as dumb as naive lol
Waiting is part of it, doesn't matter if it's 1 day or 10 years. Crowdfunding is sponsoring ideas not buying stuff. If you want to buy stuff stick to traditional business.
Star Citizen crybaby's aren't special, they are the same species that cry foul in any other ambitious crowdfunded game: Crowfall, Camelot Unchained, KingdomCome Delverance, Ashes of Creation etc
All have their "concerners" who got into way over their heads. There's nothing wrong with any of these games development, it's business as possible, it's dumb people expectations that's wrong.
So it's up to them to cope with it. And for most the only way to cope with it is "make noise", mostly useless toxic gibberish to try and ease the pain (frustration). Won't work, might as well and move on to things you like or risk to be "damaged" forever lol
No one forced these developers to take money from the crowd. They did so knowingly. Any backlash they feel from backers getting impatient is warranted, because they chose to engage uneducated consumers directly for funding.
It's quite ironic that you would post on and on about how backers go into the deal with unrealistic expectations for devs, all the while making the case that devs shouldn't have expected this impatience when they eschewed using traditional publishers to fleece the crowd repeatedly using unrealistic and unachievable development timelines. Nobody forced them to give those dates; nothing but the pressure to get more money from the crowd pressured devs into giving unrealistic timelines. If that blows up in a dev's face, he has no one to blame but himself.
It seems to me that the biggest beef around here is that no one is walking around the CIG offices with a big whip forcing them to push out some half finished generic crap while they all live on bread crumbs.
That's the basic mistake. The crowdfunded campaign comes first and all the risk, effort and money spent launching it is not on the gamer's expenses. Then it's up to the gamer to evaluate the inherent risks of their decisions. The crowdfunding company did their part, it risked a LOT up front with no guarantees to get that time/money/effort back.
Now it's up to the gamer to decide if he wants to risk or not. They took the first step and now are asking if someone else to take the risk to joining them.
Nobody is forced to give money in advance so you can't expect anything but to lose your money. If you are not willing to risk it stay away from crowdfunded projects. Simple. Crying won't make you more right. The thing is that the world is filled with naive and ignorant people who get themselves into stuff they don't fully understand and then have a miserable time coping with the disappointment. That is their own fault, ofc it's easier to blame other's instead of owning their mistake/ignorance.
Stop being crybabys because of video games and own it up, or you take the risk and live with it or you end up crying in the corners for eternity. Own your actions instead of blaming others for your faults.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/I'm also not sure where you are getting "boundaries, cut scenes, invisible walls..."; I don't think that was ever a part of the Kickstarter pitch, but it may have been a factor of technical limitations they ran into along the way.
Isn't it a fact that the number of planets and star systems to be included at launch has been greatly reduced?
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Yes, I know, its grown in ways far beyond the original vision but also remember some fans never asked for it to do so.
Also I feel releasing SQ42 will prove they can actually hit a target and finish something, which continues to be a valid point of debate until it occurs.
Besides, I need a good new space sim / game to play before I retire and 9 yrs will cut it way too close
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon