I find this whole thing extremely sad in some ways. I'm a gamer, I love space games and i would normally be totally the target market for Star Citizen and be extremely hyped. I own almost every space game on the market - bought 2 yesterday even (Angels Fall First, Evochron Legacy - both a lot of fun).
My negative feelings to SC come from the following:
Snobbery against 'big publisher' games - I'm sorry but i've got a hard drive full of EXCELLENT big publisher games. I just can't buy into this anti-publisher mentality.
Monetisation - I loathe microtransactions, IAP, DLC, and paid-for shortcuts. If the game is good enough i'll want to play it not buy my way to the end game. I hate the selling of currency too, it screams 'you wont have enough currency in the game to have fun'. I'm just about OK with expansion packs, as long as they really add something new and extend the game significantly.
Unequal playing field - space whales in juggernauts versus normal players on skateboards. Sure they might one day catch up but how much crap will they have to take? Will they stick it out? Where will the whales be by then - super millionaires and bossing the game?
Arrogance - The BDSSE. Snarky comments about other space sims. Blame culture. Lack of personal accountability for problems. Its always someone else. Revisionism.
Hubris - Too big to fail. Also see Arrogance. There's ship called the Titanic, it isn't sailing anymore. It was pretty fancy too. The BD Ship E.
Wasting money - without any regret or apology. There has been a lot of money down the drain - canned work, rework. Very expensive and all funded by gamers who are being treated like cattle to be milked.
No hope of full delivery - I do (and lead) software design for a living - been on some huge projects - there is an enormous gap between what they say they are going to do and what they are actually doing. Its just not possible to close that gap without industrial cubic strength money and a lot of time, both of which are running out. They have delivered a fraction of the promised features. A tiny fraction. Its not like they are even halfway there, they are less than 10% there.
Selling dreams - to people like me. It hurts as I can see what is coming.
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.
Only took 9 posts to invoke Godwin's law. Congratulations you lose the internet!
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
No hope of full delivery - I do (and lead) software design for a living - been on some huge projects - there is an enormous gap between what they say they are going to do and what they are actually doing. Its just not possible to close that gap without industrial cubic strength money and a lot of time, both of which are running out. They have delivered a fraction of the promised features. A tiny fraction. Its not like they are even halfway there, they are less than 10% there.
I agree with you on most of what you say. However, the last point is a bit speculative, errr, a lot speculative. To assert that they are less than 10% done indicates that you have intimate knowledge of their progress, which you don't. I appreciate your professional opinion, but I would have expected more too, being that I'm in the same industry. You know what happens, you know the badness behind the scenes, but you also know that people looking in on your project from a high level have no clue about where you're actually at, all they know about is what you've delivered to date. You could have a plethora of features sitting on the doorstep, but it can't be introduced because of dependency issues.
The big problem here is that they gave the impression that it was a modular design. However, somewhere along the line these modules became highly dependent, which introduced huge risks. Now, I'm assuming, they can't even cut the cord on these modules because they're so deeply embedded, hence they begin cutting back scope.
I said this before, about another supposed software developer, and that is that I have rarely, if ever, seen a project deliver on time, on budget, and to scope. Scope adjustment is ongoing and always in flux. Please don't respond and tell me that you do because you subscribe to Agile, because we all know that's a crock and you might deliver what is expected of the product at that point in time, but it's nowhere near what the PM actually wanted in the beginning. Finally, the biggest mistake that they ever made was being transparent. Honestly, it's sad because people scream for transparency, but the vast majority of people simply can't handle the reality of software projects. Shoot, even professionals can't seem to handle transparency.
there is a saying if the goal post keep shifting around its really impossible to score goals..
my 2 cents
It's only impossible if the two teams can't agree on what's acceptable and realistic. Moving goal posts is a great analogy of software development. However, games still ship.
I respect your opinion Crazy - I hope it comes good for the gamers who are supporting the game.
Well it'll be difficult to deliver something as good as what is expected by some, but it'll arrive somewhere between where Alpha is right now and what was originally spec'd (yes, we can thank Captain Obvious now).
Comments
My negative feelings to SC come from the following:
Snobbery against 'big publisher' games - I'm sorry but i've got a hard drive full of EXCELLENT big publisher games. I just can't buy into this anti-publisher mentality.
Monetisation - I loathe microtransactions, IAP, DLC, and paid-for shortcuts. If the game is good enough i'll want to play it not buy my way to the end game. I hate the selling of currency too, it screams 'you wont have enough currency in the game to have fun'. I'm just about OK with expansion packs, as long as they really add something new and extend the game significantly.
Unequal playing field - space whales in juggernauts versus normal players on skateboards. Sure they might one day catch up but how much crap will they have to take? Will they stick it out? Where will the whales be by then - super millionaires and bossing the game?
Arrogance - The BDSSE. Snarky comments about other space sims. Blame culture. Lack of personal accountability for problems. Its always someone else. Revisionism.
Hubris - Too big to fail. Also see Arrogance. There's ship called the Titanic, it isn't sailing anymore. It was pretty fancy too. The BD Ship E.
Wasting money - without any regret or apology. There has been a lot of money down the drain - canned work, rework. Very expensive and all funded by gamers who are being treated like cattle to be milked.
No hope of full delivery - I do (and lead) software design for a living - been on some huge projects - there is an enormous gap between what they say they are going to do and what they are actually doing. Its just not possible to close that gap without industrial cubic strength money and a lot of time, both of which are running out. They have delivered a fraction of the promised features. A tiny fraction. Its not like they are even halfway there, they are less than 10% there.
Selling dreams - to people like me. It hurts as I can see what is coming.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
I agree with you on most of what you say. However, the last point is a bit speculative, errr, a lot speculative. To assert that they are less than 10% done indicates that you have intimate knowledge of their progress, which you don't. I appreciate your professional opinion, but I would have expected more too, being that I'm in the same industry. You know what happens, you know the badness behind the scenes, but you also know that people looking in on your project from a high level have no clue about where you're actually at, all they know about is what you've delivered to date. You could have a plethora of features sitting on the doorstep, but it can't be introduced because of dependency issues.
The big problem here is that they gave the impression that it was a modular design. However, somewhere along the line these modules became highly dependent, which introduced huge risks. Now, I'm assuming, they can't even cut the cord on these modules because they're so deeply embedded, hence they begin cutting back scope.
I said this before, about another supposed software developer, and that is that I have rarely, if ever, seen a project deliver on time, on budget, and to scope. Scope adjustment is ongoing and always in flux. Please don't respond and tell me that you do because you subscribe to Agile, because we all know that's a crock and you might deliver what is expected of the product at that point in time, but it's nowhere near what the PM actually wanted in the beginning. Finally, the biggest mistake that they ever made was being transparent. Honestly, it's sad because people scream for transparency, but the vast majority of people simply can't handle the reality of software projects. Shoot, even professionals can't seem to handle transparency.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
my 2 cents
It's only impossible if the two teams can't agree on what's acceptable and realistic. Moving goal posts is a great analogy of software development. However, games still ship.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Well it'll be difficult to deliver something as good as what is expected by some, but it'll arrive somewhere between where Alpha is right now and what was originally spec'd (yes, we can thank Captain Obvious now).
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------