Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Star Citizen, I am disappointed.
rpmcmurphy
Member EpicPosts: 3,502
in Star Citizen
An article by one of the guys at Eurogamer. Yes it's a critical article but the majority of it is valid criticism.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-01-09-star-citizen-alpha-3-impressions
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-01-09-star-citizen-alpha-3-impressions
Comments
"It feels petty to slam a game in alpha" then continues regardless and his reasoning? because Star Citizen is high profile so it's OK!
It pretty much literally reads - I can't believe this alpha doesn't play like a finished game, I am so disappointed........
just lol
Ahh Mr Murph, always searching for those bad reviews or bad angles to post about SC. So reliable!
When do they plan to launch then? Until you have at least an estimate, all criticism regarding the lack of progress or delay in delivery is valid.
It does not matter what is accomplished to date, only how much work/time is left to reach a MVP state so players can experience the entire game as it is has been promised to be.
"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
BOOO HOOO BUT IT TAKING SOOOO LOOOONG WAHHHHHHHHH!
"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
"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
My guess is two years for SQ42, four years for the larger game.
Make a note of it.
"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
My guess has been 1.5 yrs for beta and another 1 year for mvp. With some slight slippage possible. But latest expected progress report for SC this year is very worrying, it reads not far from my own guestimates. So either they have suddenly changed their projection methods drastically or I am now way off!
edit: I expect first part of sq42 roughly around the same time as beta for PU.
It is indeed petty slamming an Alpha game for its performance or lack of content, if there are things that are implied, that is one of them, not much to complain, they don't state SC is a finished, polished and optimized game either... independent of the dev time.
That's a literal cliché of an argument, as seen in most early access games out there.
Anyway, while 3.0 is a great jump from what was being offered until then, the game is in no condition of facing reviews, issues like the performance and bugs as mentioned are capable to kill game loops pretty quickly. Being 3.1 a patch dedicated to bug-fixing and polish upon what just released, hoping that irons out several issues.
Guy plays game
Guy doesn't like game.
Fans claim game is still in alpha!
Star Citizen: goalpost tetris.
..Cake..
It's not about slamming an alpha, it's about critiquing 5 years (and over $150 million worth) of development.
Sounds about right imo.
But I doubt they'll have everything they claim to want to include in SC in 4 years.
Development is incredibly slow.
It should be a much more complete game by then though.. hopefully.
..Cake..
It feels like there is one side white knighting the game no matter what and another side who just wants to bash the game, making up flaws if needed. I'm not sure who started first, probably a bit both, but in the end it looks like each side of the argument feels justified to make up claims in order to compensate for the other side's lies.
Lack of features or things to do should be a given for a game in development. I didn't believe the "3.0 will show you all" crowd and I don't buy the "this is the same as release" crowd either.
The only part I can objectively care about in that article is the performances. I have never seem a game that struggles to stay above 30 fps with no people in sight and just 20 players on the server get fixed and not have any lag at release; but maybe I haven't played enough games.
The reality of 3.0 is that it is what was expectable, it has its feature-set, it allows for the gameplay that was multiple times demoed, and it is under the alpha reality that falls on its performance, stability and bugs that are implied, you can just debate the frequency and intensity of such issues on playability.
3.0 is a major patch, the biggest patch the game has gotten actually, and that is what was promoted. But those who were acting up like 3.0 would not come with the issues the alpha implies, were falling on their own unrealistic expectations.
I myself expected was better servers, that didn't come to happen, they did increase the pop from 24 to 50 but the major point was to stop bottlenecking the frame rates so much.
It's not even the lack of content argument, 3.0 with better servers and less breaking bugs (those who force restarts) is all it needs.
I am not slamming it for being an alpha, I didn't write the article.
I thought you were past telling people what they meant and trying to put words in other people's mouths but evidentally not.
The reality is that Chris is on record saying 3.0 would be equivalent to early access and that it would be more approachable for a wider audience, implying that it would have left its highly volatile development stage and entered a more playable period of development.
SC also is still in alpha. .. STILL is the key there I think. I don't think there was any ill intent but when you launch a kickstarter you should deliver on the initial promise and not continually add stretch goals etc. Add that after with continued funds.
While it seems like 1 in 10 EA titles release finished this game is just so different. It will make or break any future chances of someone else trying to do the same thing depending on how it turns out. I hope it launches in all of its glory but I really just wanted Wing Commander updated with a supported multi-player (private servers). Sort of what was initially suggested.
I can see where the author is conflicted. It isn't just an Alpha. . it is a looooong alpha with incredible funding and constantly moving targets for release.
Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!
Then you sincerely have my sympathies. There is a silver lining though, your loss is my gain. I love the beefed up version of everything
It is just an alpha, with a pretty noooooormal dev time for such a large project.
>>>
The two main things that stand out in this article or review of the alhpa is:
~ looks great ( can make nice post cards) but no content... which is kind of no duh and a cheap shot IMO.
~ optimization sucks when it comes to fps etc even on really high end rigs which is IMO a very very valid complaint....CIG seriously needs to get it stuff together and get some of the backend optimized so you can get more than 15 fps when there a moderate amount of people in the game.
While I get this is an ambitious project and maybe they want to add more things to the game before optimization it's taking far far longer than it should to reach each step and that's not really something anyone can argue away......add in gamers who are not very forgiving and you need to expect reviews like this.
I think CIG need to start taking reviews like this a little more seriously than they have been.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.