Star Citizen honeymoon is over

Brenics · January 2016

Nice write up by PCPowerPlay!

http://tinyurl.com/jbhbqv2

Deathenger · January 2016

The author said that article was written 4 to 5 months ago. Odd that it would be posted on that site now, out of nowhere.

GeezerGamer · January 2016

yeah but.....
Who's Ben Mansil?
I mean, yeah, I live under a rock, but I've never heard of him or this site.

Thourne · January 2016

GeezerGamer said:

yeah but.....
Who's Ben Mansil?
I mean, yeah, I live under a rock, but I've never heard of him or this site.

^ that
Unknown site posts opinion piece by unknown guy.
Do note it is an opinion piece not a news article.

UnleadedRev · January 2016

SC = Disaster

Roin · January 2016

Someone is trying too hard.

Thourne · January 2016

Roin said:

Someone is trying too hard.

Aye, almost like they have an agenda, eh?

CrazKanuk · January 2016

Brenics said:

Nice write up by PCPowerPlay!

http://tinyurl.com/jbhbqv2

I'm not understanding why this is a good article. I feel like I clicked it thinking that I was going to get something, ANYHTING that someone with even an average amount of knowledge of SC and an 80 IQ could write. NOPE! Wrong on both counts.

What's most sad is that the author has, apparently, dumped $1000+ into the game and talks as though there's nothing to play. Check your email occasionally!! Alpha 2.1 is out there!

Additionally, we dive deep down the rabbit hole of the contextual abyss that is "being late". I've said before and I'll say again, I actually went WAAAAAY out on a limb before and stated without any sort of fact checking that I'd bet around 80% of games that are on these "Most Anticipated of 2016" lists are games which have been delayed for some amount of time. Guess what? Of the 4 or 5 sites I checked, I think I was pretty damn close (I think the number was 75%ish). So if we're going to do and apples-to-apples comparison, what is the real meat of this story now? Let's not use the "late" argument because it's really just a sad attempt to gain a foothold, but while I sounds good, when it's placed into context, it's bullshit.

Secondly, he still believes that CR is driving the ship, lol. He talks about CR needing to delegate more and trust more. This actually made me giggle a little bit inside. To believe that CR is taking sole responsibility for all of the decision making (even when he had a more involved role) is just funny.

I'm really sorry, but I seriously doubt this person has dropped $1000 into the game and, secondly, this article would have been more relevant if it had been posted a year ago. So I think someone should copy it, fire up the Delorean, and zoom their asses back to a time when this article was relevant.

Muke · January 2016

Thourne said:

Roin said:

Someone is trying too hard.

Aye, almost like they have an agenda, eh?

Conspiracies, illuminati, aliens....I tell you.

barasawa · January 2016

Any article that opens with "Opinion: Derek Smart is probably right." should fire off all kinds of red flags immediately. It's kind of like saying "Hitler had some really great ideas for social change.", except without all the genocide and wars.
I read it, and didn't see anything worth repeating, just the same old dross and suppositions.

By the way, I checked, and PC Powerplay is an Australian outfit, so that might be why you haven't heard of them. It might also explain why they decided to try and drum up interest by trying to stir up that old pile of B.S..

In my case, I've 'watched' D.S. mount campaigns of epic trolling and flame wars for almost 20 years. As far as I know, none of his accusations against anyone have ever panned out. I guess that people should really follow the golden rule of internet, don't feed the trolls, especially a king troll with a grudge.

Talonsin · January 2016

feroshus · January 2016

Terrible old article, just a bunch of lame speculation, not even that provocative. Terrible thread title, makes absolutely no sense with the article. Anyone who thinks that's a "Nice write up" is definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer. You should be ashamed OP, this is a new low for even the SC forums...

scorpex-x · January 2016

Derek Smart is like Donald Trump, he says stupid nonsense just to get attention for his god awful mess of a game.

End of the day, SC is a massive success and even though it's delayed it doesn't matter. Some nobody journalist on some backwater website doesn't change that.

I'm not a fan of SC, nor do I hate it. I don't care either way but to say it's a failure or that the "honeymoon is over" is laughable. It has a massive hardcore fanbase eager for it, and making it better is all he has to say to placate them.

Adjuvant1 · January 2016

CrazKanuk said:

What's most sad is that the author has, apparently, dumped $1000+ into the game and talks as though there's nothing to play. Check your email occasionally!! Alpha 2.1 is out there!

No. The company's spin has banged your brain into a sort of blissful ignorance. Parroting their nonsense and citing wikipedia doesn't fix it. This iteration is not "Alpha". It doesn't really matter what you say, you're wrong.

SpottyGekko · January 2016

What makes the unsubstantiated allegations and sensationalism of some random Australian any more important than the same stuff posted by various people on these forums ?

There are 2 certainties here:

development on SC will continue
Brenics will keep trying to stop it

Adjuvant1 · January 2016

SpottyGekko said:

What makes the unsubstantiated allegations and sensationalism of some random Australian any more important than the same stuff posted by various people on these forums ?

There are 2 certainties here:
development on SC will continue
Brenics will keep trying to stop it

I don't think he's trying to stop it. How could he? Of course it will continue, but people deserve to have a better understanding, a better perspective, than the full-on fake high of the punch sc marketing is distributing to mollify opinion of lesser-understanding public.

The real fact of the matter is that if this is all they have to show, the project is in real trouble. Going forward will be a nightmare of rectifying a buggy mess of ill-fitting modules and, best-case scenario, the finished product sometimes in 2018 will be of significantly lesser scope than ever advertised. People deserve to understand this.

edit: People deserve to understand this because there may still be people on the fence thinking of throwing the project money. Hold on to your money until the game releases, and see if it's something that deserves your money. That's all I'm saying, all anyone could say at this point, since most people can't get refunds anymore.

SpottyGekko · January 2016

Adjuvant1 said:

... Going forward will be a nightmare of rectifying a buggy mess of ill-fitting modules and, best-case scenario, the finished product sometimes in 2018 will be of significantly lesser scope than ever advertised. People deserve to understand this.

We seem to have made some solid progress in the last 12 months, lol

A year ago, the popular chorus here was that SC was a complete scam and that no game actually existed. CR was apparently buying private islands with the money, or some such.

Now, many are saying that there is in fact a game, but that it will be 10 years late, unplayable, 25% of what was promised, etc., blah, blah, rabble, rabble...

I wonder how the song will change over the next 12 months ?

CrazKanuk · January 2016

Adjuvant1 said:

CrazKanuk said:

What's most sad is that the author has, apparently, dumped $1000+ into the game and talks as though there's nothing to play. Check your email occasionally!! Alpha 2.1 is out there!

No. The company's spin has banged your brain into a sort of blissful ignorance. Parroting their nonsense and citing wikipedia doesn't fix it. This iteration is not "Alpha". It doesn't really matter what you say, you're wrong.

There was some banging going on, but it was me banging my head on my desk trying to kill enough brain cells to find relevance in the article. You think that was a good article? Like for real?

I'm not going to comment on how good or not good the game is in it's current state. What I can say is that people are currently playing in an Alpha of SC with some varying degrees of success. You're right, it doesn't really matter what I say, but if you've got something to offer to the conversation, I'm more than willing to hear it. Please, enlighten me as to what your vast knowledge of Alphas is. Regale me with stories of "the bad old days" when you played games where you could walk off the map, or there were missing textures, or blank textures with descriptive text telling you what should be there, "WALL", so you understand why you can't walk forward. I love to hear about stories of what alpha testing was like in the old days... because I was there. So, I'm sorry son, but it seems you may have been spoiled, as people are these days, with alphas and betas.

I actually don't, normally, test games in alpha and beta any more because I work in the software industry and it just feels like bringing work home with me now. However!!! If you feel like providing me with actual, verifiable, issues with the game, I will happily research it, confirm, it and report back with my professional opinion. However, the reality of the situation is that I've seen very little reports of wide-spread issues. Shit, if there were, then there would be ammunition for these anti-SC advocates to blast holes into things. There's nothing though!

I just like how I can't give a neutral opinion without being a fanboy? Please. Go read the article and tell me it was informative and intellectually stimulating. If you can do that and tell me that with a straight face, then you win.

Adjuvant1 · January 2016

Look at this. Do you see this?

http://starcitizen.wikia.com/wiki/Anticipated_release_schedule

Whatever you think you're saying, stop it. If there aren't a thousand people flying around you, if there is minimal, single-player-esque gameplay, it is feature-incomplete Squadron 42, not alpha Star Citizen.

Phaserlight · January 2016

CrazKanuk said:

Brenics said:

Nice write up by PCPowerPlay!

http://tinyurl.com/jbhbqv2

I'm not understanding why this is a good article. I feel like I clicked it thinking that I was going to get something, ANYHTING that someone with even an average amount of knowledge of SC and an 80 IQ could write. NOPE! Wrong on both counts.

What's most sad is that the author has, apparently, dumped $1000+ into the game and talks as though there's nothing to play. Check your email occasionally!! Alpha 2.1 is out there!

Additionally, we dive deep down the rabbit hole of the contextual abyss that is "being late". I've said before and I'll say again, I actually went WAAAAAY out on a limb before and stated without any sort of fact checking that I'd bet around 80% of games that are on these "Most Anticipated of 2016" lists are games which have been delayed for some amount of time. Guess what? Of the 4 or 5 sites I checked, I think I was pretty damn close (I think the number was 75%ish). So if we're going to do and apples-to-apples comparison, what is the real meat of this story now? Let's not use the "late" argument because it's really just a sad attempt to gain a foothold, but while I sounds good, when it's placed into context, it's bullshit.

Secondly, he still believes that CR is driving the ship, lol. He talks about CR needing to delegate more and trust more. This actually made me giggle a little bit inside. To believe that CR is taking sole responsibility for all of the decision making (even when he had a more involved role) is just funny.

I'm really sorry, but I seriously doubt this person has dropped $1000 into the game and, secondly, this article would have been more relevant if it had been posted a year ago. So I think someone should copy it, fire up the Delorean, and zoom their asses back to a time when this article was relevant.

A little quick to jump down the author's throat, CK: scroll down a bit past the article and find this comment:

"Author here. While this article is dated today it was written several months ago for my PCPP magazine opinion page, just a few days after Mr Smart made a big deal about getting his money back. I was surprised to see it posted here, now.

Since then, as we know, the story has taken many twists and turns with much evolving drama. Since then, too, we've been able to see and enjoy tangible SC gaming in the latest alpha 2.1, which goes a long way to assuring me, and I'm sure many others perhaps also including Derek Smart that real work is getting done.

Regardless of that though, I don't think the piece I wrote has dated that badly and it remains a generally fair assessment of concerns still shared by some in the community today."

adamlotus75 · January 2016

There is a real divide of opinion about SC - both sides seem unwilling to try to understand the other and to be more objective. It's descended into playground insults and no one is trying to defuse it.

Gruug · January 2016

Brenics said:

Nice write up by PCPowerPlay!

http://tinyurl.com/jbhbqv2

Read it. You will see that this is a guy that spent a lot of money supporting SC. As you read that, there is no way to miss that he is disgruntled due to HIS sense of how long it should take to make SC. He also takes issue with Chris Roberts "imposing his will" upon the project. It is afterall Chris Roberts' project no matter how much money this guy has put into it. Chris can make the project how he see fit and ask that things go as CR desires. It will only be once the project is finished that people finally be able say whether it was the right choices on CR's part.

As a side note, I am not a big supporter of this game. I do hope that it turns out well though. My problem with this type of discussion is that it is born of too many slanted opinions and with little consideration of the real world. Any company be it RSI/Clound Imperium or Ford Motor Company has a right to run their company as they see fit. It is only the consumer in the end that vote with their wallets if they make the right decisions.

Quesa · January 2016

Deathenger said:

The author said that article was written 4 to 5 months ago. Odd that it would be posted on that site now, out of nowhere.

So basically written before all of the significant additions/deployments which all took place in the last 2 months? Brilliant.

Apparently from the author, in the comments:

Author here. While this article is dated today it was written several months ago for my PCPP magazine opinion page, just a few days after Mr Smart made a big deal about getting his money back. I was surprised to see it posted here, now.

Since then, as we know, the story has taken many twists and turns with much evolving drama. Since then, too, we've been able to see and enjoy tangible SC gaming in the latest alpha 2.1, which goes a long way to assuring me, and I'm sure many others perhaps also including Derek Smart that real work is getting done.

Regardless of that though, I don't think the piece I wrote has dated that badly and it remains a generally fair assessment of concerns still shared by some in the community today.

Adjuvant1 · January 2016

Gruug said:

Brenics said:

Nice write up by PCPowerPlay!

http://tinyurl.com/jbhbqv2

Read it. You will see that this is a guy that spent a lot of money supporting SC. As you read that, there is no way to miss that he is disgruntled due to HIS sense of how long it should take to make SC. He also takes issue with Chris Roberts "imposing his will" upon the project. It is afterall Chris Roberts' project no matter how much money this guy has put into it. Chris can make the project how he see fit and ask that things go as CR desires. It will only be once the project is finished that people finally be able say whether it was the right choices on CR's part.

As a side note, I am not a big supporter of this game. I do hope that it turns out well though. My problem with this type of discussion is that it is born of too many slanted opinions and with little consideration of the real world. Any company be it RSI/Clound Imperium or Ford Motor Company has a right to run their company as they see fit. It is only the consumer in the end that vote with their wallets if they make the right decisions.

The public voted with their wallets on promises which have yet, a long time later, to be fulfilled, and they can't get their money back if they wanted. Your point is bad.

adamlotus75 · January 2016

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle between the critics and the white knights. It's clear that they are delivering *something* but it's also clear that they are way way behind where they need to be to get it all done and finished before money runs out. If I was a backer I'd be hoping that they could replan the project to get some clear milestones in place and lay out exactly how they are going to deliver the finished game.

they should finish SQ42, sell some boxes, then make the PU. Completely down tools on the PU right now.

feroshus · January 2016

Adjuvant1 said:

Look at this. Do you see this?

http://starcitizen.wikia.com/wiki/Anticipated_release_schedule

Whatever you think you're saying, stop it. If there aren't a thousand people flying around you, if there is minimal, single-player-esque gameplay, it is feature-incomplete Squadron 42, not alpha Star Citizen.

It is what it is, who really cares what they call it. It's clear they're putting a ton of work into the game, and that's all anyone can really ask for. The article in question still sucks as journalism or even as an opinion piece. Splitting hairs over which build is which or what they should or shouldn't be calling it just makes you sound like a desperate entitled troll.

Howdy, Stranger!

Star Citizen honeymoon is over

Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Star Citizen honeymoon is over

Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event

Comments