The Lack of Delivered Content

Arkade99 · November 2015

CrazKanuk said:

Arkade99 said:

Asm0deus said:

Your premise is flawed. You are talking about content being delivered as if it was a released game that is live.

It is not.

The game is still under development and what we have access to now is something they gave us to play around with till the game is ready and also to help them test stuff out.

What it comes down to is they are still in development and as such have no obligation to deliver us "content" until it goes live.

Personally I am okay with waiting rather than have a half arsed game pushed on us because of some pencil pushers deadline and bottom line. Many of us are tired of that kind of thing which was another thing which made SC KS successful.

In their kickstarter, RSI said the game would include certain things. This is the basic list of things the game would include as detailed on their kickstarter campaign page:

Real quick, Star Citizen is:
A rich universe focused on epic space adventure, trading and dogfighting in first person.
Single Player – Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play)
Persistent Universe (hosted by US)
Mod-able multiplayer (hosted by YOU)
No Subscriptions
No Pay to Win

The campaign also says that estimated delivery of the final product is November 2014.

It is now November 2015 and they have raised way more money than they ever thought they would. So why is the game a year late with no launch date in sight?

Chalking that up to "development" doesn't cut it. Their budget grew by leaps and bounds, yet they have proven incapable of making the game in anything close to the time frame they estimated. That's not to say that they won't eventually make the game and that it won't be great, but I don't see how you can give them a pass to this point.

How many games deliver all features expected or stated? I know that Elite: Dangerous didn't deliver their Offline game. Even with published games, I know that NHL didn't deliver a franchise mode one year. Everyone is welcome to an opinion, obviously, but if you're setting a standard, then is this a standard that you uphold for all games you play? Or do you have a chip on your shoulder?

As far as delivery date is concerned. Again, games are delayed quite frequently. Also, the scope of the game changed during and after the crowd-funding. I didn't hear the yelling and screaming about the increased scope while these scope increases were happening. It was all about making the game into something that the community really wanted to see, not just a simplified space flight sim. That is, apparently, what the community wanted. Granted, I'm sure there are those who were more interested in having a game released on time, but the majority wanted a larger game and, with that, comes a longer schedule. In response to that increase in scope, they have began offering refunds to backers who aren't happy which is pretty nice, I think.

I really have a difficult time with armchair software developers with no idea what it takes to develop a game. Where a character might take a month to finish or an environment might take months to complete. Never mind that they're apparently trying to do something "impossible". I can appreciate your point about them missing their estimate, but I'd much rather see the game delivered with the features as it sits right now than a simplistic game devoid of any innovation. If you don't feel the same then I'd definitely request a refund. Otherwise, 2016 seems to be the year they're putting out there right now.

What other game companies have done or have failed to do isn't relevant. That's a straw man argument that doesn't change the fact that RSI has gone way beyond their estimated launch date, despite having a ton more money than they said they needed to make the game, and no one, including RSI, has any idea when the game will launch.

Armchair developers? Apparently RSI has no idea what it takes to develop a game either since they have so grossly missed on their budgeting and time estimations. Yes, games, particularly MMOs, are difficult to make. They involve unexpected costs and delays. But for any game, there is a point beyond which those costs and delays become damning. RSI is way beyond that point.

RSI's kickstarter goal was 500k and they estimated a finished product by November 2014. They have raised over 93 million and yet they still don't have a finished product a year past their projected date.

How can you not see a problem with that? How much money and time are you willing to give them? If we are still here talking about this in November 2016, after they have raised over 100 million, will you still give them a pass and chalk it up to "development"?

TheJoda · November 2015

Yes they are far behind a "rough" schedule or timeline; however, look at the quality they are going for and have designed and showed already. This is not a simple project. He is doing space, ground, innership, and a whole universe.

I do agree they should of came up with a more realistic timeline at the start, but at the rate they are going the end project will be worth it 120%!

Gdemami · November 2015

olepi said:

Maybe they are falling prey to a common problem:

"We need a hammer."

"Ok, we'll start working on a hammer factory right away ..."

Not really. They bought a lot of assets but somehow nothing notable came out of it...

Arkade99 · November 2015

TheJoda said:

Yes they are far behind a "rough" schedule or timeline; however, look at the quality they are going for and have designed and showed already. This is not a simple project. He is doing space, ground, innership, and a whole universe.
I do agree they should of came up with a more realistic timeline at the start, but at the rate they are going the end project will be worth it 120%!

It isn't just the time, it's the money. Their goal was to raise 500k. They have raised 93 million. Raising 186 times what they said they needed isn't enough to finish the game even close to on schedule?

goboygo · November 2015

I have a nice simple answer for you. The game isn't done yet .

Everything else is speculation. Like the talking head shows before the super bowl All I hear is wah WAH wah WAH wah. But keep on talking.

Katilla · November 2015

Arkade99 said:

TheJoda said:

Yes they are far behind a "rough" schedule or timeline; however, look at the quality they are going for and have designed and showed already. This is not a simple project. He is doing space, ground, innership, and a whole universe.
I do agree they should of came up with a more realistic timeline at the start, but at the rate they are going the end project will be worth it 120%!

It isn't just the time, it's the money. Their goal was to raise 500k. They have raised 93 million. Raising 186 times what they said they needed isn't enough to finish the game even close to on schedule?

you ARE aware that the average mmo takes around 5 years to develop right? 98 million isn't a big deal either when you see how much money was spent on other MMO games either. Do some research.

scorpex-x · November 2015

For me, the problem with this game isn't that it won't be released because it's a money making machine. You can bet they will finish it, what bothered me and why I never actually backed it was because I knew it was a 4-5 year project and I didn't want to invest in something like that.

So yeah, you have another 2? years for the final thing. Suck it up and wait, it takes time to make massive projects like this.

At least the wing commander version will be out next year.

holdenhamlet · November 2015

I'm curious- what incentive is there to actually finish the game? They are apparently making millions every month right now.

Any game, no matter how great, can fail once released. A game that's never released can't fail because it doesn't exist.

BeansnBread · November 2015

holdenhamlet said:

I'm curious- what incentive is there to actually finish the game? They are apparently making millions every month right now.

Any game, no matter how great, can fail once released. A game that's never released can't fail because it doesn't exist.

I assume there will be a point at which not even the most rabid fanboy can accept any more extensions on a release date(s) and their funding will start to dry up if they don't release. That may not be till 2018 or later though.

Realizer · November 2015

Well given games that are mediocre at best take on average 5 years to develop, I'm expecting this one to take just as long if not a bit longer. It's already pretty clear from the screenshot threads on Neogaf that comparing SC screenshots to other top games. SC's visuals on a high end system are top notch, and already rival most every other game in those threads. Excellent visuals like that aren't something that can be created with only +/- 200 workers in under 4 years.

Also I think they are being very cautious with what they release, they know it needs to be a bit more fleshed out for a major alpha phase than they once thought. All the recent negative press is steering them toward longer release times to make sure they give players more of what they are expecting.

I personally don't mind though, there's so many games I intend on playing between now and it's release that I'm sort of glad it's taking longer. The Korean mmos coming out early 2016, and the Square Enix, and Blizzard projects Summer 2016; I'll be plenty busy. That's not even mentioning the smaller crowdfunded projects that will be coming out late 2016 like Crowfall, and Camelot Unchained. I know once SC does finally launch a lot of my game time will end up there.

Erillion · November 2015

holdenhamlet said:

I think they should just keep adding new features and selling them and continue pushing back the release date.

The last feature/stretch goal was added over a year ago. And it was something that was already existing in the CryEngine (=Pets).

You find the complete list of features/stretch goals here:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

Have fun

Shaigh · November 2015

While its a valid argument that game development is difficult and takes a lot of time it also eliminates the idea that their module release pace will suddenly speed up and we will get everything that was promised in a short time frame. If all they can get done during 2015 is planetside module and arena commander 2.0 its hard to imagine that we will have squadron 42, star marine and persistent universe during 2016 with all those things integrated into a fully released game in 2017.

While they have promised that squadron 42 will be released during 2016 I expect them to release the first part in fall 2016, hopefully second part before christmas with the third part being released in 2017. I hope that star marine will show up in 2016 with persistent universe showing up in 2017 and that star citizen will be fully released in 2018.

I make those assumptions based on how this game has handled earlier modules, how other kickstarters has handled episodic releases. I also compare RSI with a developer like zenimax online studios that had around 250 employees. They did a 9 months beta on elder scrolls online with a game that had a far smaller scope than star citizen. They still needed another 6 months to get it in a shape that was worthy of release.

holdenhamlet · November 2015

Erillion said:

holdenhamlet said:

I think they should just keep adding new features and selling them and continue pushing back the release date.

The last feature/stretch goal was added over a year ago. And it was something that was already existing in the CryEngine (=Pets).

You find the complete list of features/stretch goals here:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

Have fun

Even better. They don't have to even come up with new features to explain the delay. They are still getting millions a month doing absolutely nothing at all.

Erillion · November 2015

holdenhamlet said:
Even better. They don't have to even come up with new features to explain the delay. They are still getting millions a month doing absolutely nothing at all.

If you think they are "doing absolutely nothing at all" i recommend you read the very detailed weekly and monthly progress reports on the official Star Citizen homepage.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15043-Monthly-Studio-Report

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15045-Weekly-Development-Update

Have fun

mbrodie · November 2015

holdenhamlet said:

I'm curious- what incentive is there to actually finish the game? They are apparently making millions every month right now.

Any game, no matter how great, can fail once released. A game that's never released can't fail because it doesn't exist.

you're so on point with everything i been thinking even your previous post.

as for the people saying "but mmos take this much time and money to make" you're completely ignoring the point that as per their kickstarter they said they NEEDED 500K and 2 years to make the game a reality, now it's been 93 million and 3 years so far, with a few concept ships thrown up for sale a long the way and not a great deal to show outside of that.

Gdemami · November 2015

Erillion said:
If you think they are "doing absolutely nothing at all" i recommend you read the very detailed weekly and monthly progress reports on the official Star Citizen homepage.

Have fun

Those "reports" are glorified description or menial, routine tasks in development. It is entirely meaningless as a gauge for development progress nor it gives you any insight into actual state of development.

It is just a marketing tool.

mbrodie · November 2015

Erillion said:

holdenhamlet said:
Even better. They don't have to even come up with new features to explain the delay. They are still getting millions a month doing absolutely nothing at all.

If you think they are "doing absolutely nothing at all" i recommend you read the very detailed weekly and monthly progress reports on the official Star Citizen homepage.

Have fun

i guess because making up progress reports would be considerably harder than mock up models for ships that haven't been developed, yeah?

i need to edit this... i'm not even saying the progress reports are fake, just playing devils advocate and pointing out the flip side of what you're saying... there is always 2 sides to a story and no one except SC crew know whats really going on

Kefo · November 2015

mbrodie said:

Erillion said:

holdenhamlet said:
Even better. They don't have to even come up with new features to explain the delay. They are still getting millions a month doing absolutely nothing at all.

If you think they are "doing absolutely nothing at all" i recommend you read the very detailed weekly and monthly progress reports on the official Star Citizen homepage.

Have fun

i guess because making up progress reports would be considerably harder than mock up models for ships that haven't been developed, yeah?

i need to edit this... i'm not even saying the progress reports are fake, just playing devils advocate and pointing out the flip side of what you're saying... there is always 2 sides to a story and no one except SC crew know whats really going on

technically 3 sides. Yours, theirs and the truth :P

Heretique · November 2015

Unless you have donated a substantial amount of money and your pants are on fire because of "dates", who cares.

It'll be done when it's done.

Magnetia · November 2015

The problem with releasing as they go along is that game creation in its early stages is ugly and frustrating and not something that I would have customers experience.

When you push out playable builds this takes away time and resources from making the entire game as a whole. Pushing out playable builds means patching issues, balancing (for some strange reason) and more resources are diverted to patching and unfinished product.

There's a big difference between releasing a broken PTR prototype and a relatively polished arena commander / hangar module. The main problem is the audience, I would rather see them release footage of broken but solid mechanics in the game than have more unsatisfying releases of modules.

While they are exciting things it's hard to see the foundation of interaction between the player and the worlds themselves. What we are getting is the player interacting with smaller elements within the world. Of course I understand that the planet kind of stuff is going to come a lot later so I have tempered my expectations.

CrazKanuk · November 2015

Arkade99 said:

CrazKanuk said:

Arkade99 said:

In their kickstarter, RSI said the game would include certain things. This is the basic list of things the game would include as detailed on their kickstarter campaign page:

Real quick, Star Citizen is:
A rich universe focused on epic space adventure, trading and dogfighting in first person.
Single Player – Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play)
Persistent Universe (hosted by US)
Mod-able multiplayer (hosted by YOU)
No Subscriptions
No Pay to Win

The campaign also says that estimated delivery of the final product is November 2014.

It is now November 2015 and they have raised way more money than they ever thought they would. So why is the game a year late with no launch date in sight?

Chalking that up to "development" doesn't cut it. Their budget grew by leaps and bounds, yet they have proven incapable of making the game in anything close to the time frame they estimated. That's not to say that they won't eventually make the game and that it won't be great, but I don't see how you can give them a pass to this point.

How many games deliver all features expected or stated? I know that Elite: Dangerous didn't deliver their Offline game. Even with published games, I know that NHL didn't deliver a franchise mode one year. Everyone is welcome to an opinion, obviously, but if you're setting a standard, then is this a standard that you uphold for all games you play? Or do you have a chip on your shoulder?

As far as delivery date is concerned. Again, games are delayed quite frequently. Also, the scope of the game changed during and after the crowd-funding. I didn't hear the yelling and screaming about the increased scope while these scope increases were happening. It was all about making the game into something that the community really wanted to see, not just a simplified space flight sim. That is, apparently, what the community wanted. Granted, I'm sure there are those who were more interested in having a game released on time, but the majority wanted a larger game and, with that, comes a longer schedule. In response to that increase in scope, they have began offering refunds to backers who aren't happy which is pretty nice, I think.

I really have a difficult time with armchair software developers with no idea what it takes to develop a game. Where a character might take a month to finish or an environment might take months to complete. Never mind that they're apparently trying to do something "impossible". I can appreciate your point about them missing their estimate, but I'd much rather see the game delivered with the features as it sits right now than a simplistic game devoid of any innovation. If you don't feel the same then I'd definitely request a refund. Otherwise, 2016 seems to be the year they're putting out there right now.

What other game companies have done or have failed to do isn't relevant. That's a straw man argument that doesn't change the fact that RSI has gone way beyond their estimated launch date, despite having a ton more money than they said they needed to make the game, and no one, including RSI, has any idea when the game will launch.

Armchair developers? Apparently RSI has no idea what it takes to develop a game either since they have so grossly missed on their budgeting and time estimations. Yes, games, particularly MMOs, are difficult to make. They involve unexpected costs and delays. But for any game, there is a point beyond which those costs and delays become damning. RSI is way beyond that point.

RSI's kickstarter goal was 500k and they estimated a finished product by November 2014. They have raised over 93 million and yet they still don't have a finished product a year past their projected date.

How can you not see a problem with that? How much money and time are you willing to give them? If we are still here talking about this in November 2016, after they have raised over 100 million, will you still give them a pass and chalk it up to "development"?

Actually, what other game companies have done or failed to do in the past is completely relevant, lol. Past behaviour predicts future behaviour, son. Yes, I'm quite aware that they have missed their estimated delivery date. I'm not sure how this makes everything else irrelevant though. During the project, the scope of the project increased to a point where it is now a massive game. So do you want a half-baked space sim with a limited feature set, or do you want the game as currently stated. If it's the former, then please request a refund because it's not what the majority wants.

Also, it should be noted that in 2012 a study found that 75% of KS projects shipped late, but that only 3.6% actually failed to ship. There are a number of really interesting things you might want to think about here with regards to focusing on lateness:
1) It encourages/pressures creators to take shortcuts to get their game out
2) The project is a living thing and, yes, it became much bigger after the KS campaign and it's not difficult to see how that scope changed
3) Finally, it's the presumption that it's a store, which it isn't.

I especially like the quote from Miyamoto, "A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad." This is coming from an industry pioneer! He's been a part of some of the most recognized series' in gaming history. So I'm fairly certain that he's got much more credibility than you, or me for that matter. That being said, who are you to say when a game should be done? Who am I? It's a trust process. If you're not willing to trust that something will be delivered, then don't put your money into it. Simple as that. If you already have, then please request a refund and never venture into the crowdfunding waters again.

If the game still isn't delivered in 2016 will I be more concerned? Sure. Will it be the end of the world? Probably not. There are actually 3 retail games in the past 2 years that I pre-ordered which were delayed, one more significantly than the others (The Division). However, I wasn't at Gamestop every week asking when the hell it was going to be delivered. I wasn't emailing the publisher every day seeking a status update or asking them for more content, because they owed it to be, since I pre-ordered their game. The game will release when it releases. I see S42 content tagged with 2016, which provides some possible hint at a release date. The fact it was JUST shown at Citizencon this year leads me to believe that it's at least somewhat accurate. However I am under no illusion that it's a concrete date. That being said, will it be long beyond 2016? I really don't think so. Is it a concern to me? Nope!

LynxJSA · November 2015

CrazKanuk said:

Also, it should be noted that in 2012 a study found that 75% of KS projects shipped late, but that only 3.6% actually failed to ship.

People love to trot that out but seem unwilling to acknowledge that the success rate completely tanks when you look at a far more relevant category - Kickstarted MMOs.

Vrika · November 2015

Magnetia said:

The problem with releasing as they go along is that game creation in its early stages is ugly and frustrating and not something that I would have customers experience.

When you push out playable builds this takes away time and resources from making the entire game as a whole. Pushing out playable builds means patching issues, balancing (for some strange reason) and more resources are diverted to patching and unfinished product.

There's a big difference between releasing a broken PTR prototype and a relatively polished arena commander / hangar module. The main problem is the audience, I would rather see them release footage of broken but solid mechanics in the game than have more unsatisfying releases of modules.

While they are exciting things it's hard to see the foundation of interaction between the player and the worlds themselves. What we are getting is the player interacting with smaller elements within the world. Of course I understand that the planet kind of stuff is going to come a lot later so I have tempered my expectations.

Even if they did not release the game to us in modules, they'd still need to make a fairly polished playground for testing all the core gameplay mechanics.

Testing gameplay mechanics is not a waste of developer's time. It's essential part of creating a good game, especially when it comes to competitive multiplayer games.

CrazKanuk · November 2015

LynxJSA said:

CrazKanuk said:

Also, it should be noted that in 2012 a study found that 75% of KS projects shipped late, but that only 3.6% actually failed to ship.

People love to trot that out but seem unwilling to acknowledge that the success rate completely tanks when you look at a far more relevant category - Kickstarted MMOs.

Does it? Let's compare numbers. So I've got a list here of 31 "MMOs" as categorized by Massivelyop and a significant number are, actually, playable. Not sure if this is an exaggeration based on stereotype or based on the definition of release.

Erillion · November 2015

LynxJSA said:

CrazKanuk said:

Also, it should be noted that in 2012 a study found that 75% of KS projects shipped late, but that only 3.6% actually failed to ship.

People love to trot that out but seem unwilling to acknowledge that the success rate completely tanks when you look at a far more relevant category - Kickstarted MMOs.

Then its good that Star Citizen is not an MMO, is it not ? (see SC FAQ, its an instanced multiplayer game)

Have fun

Howdy, Stranger!

The Lack of Delivered Content

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

The Lack of Delivered Content

Comments