Indeed, there's a continuous noticeable improvement on the core mechanics in Alpha 3.2 PTU in several aspects, what is a good thing systems continue to improve to meet expectations.
Especially more waiting to see is Alpha 3.3 that is the most important step to be taken this year, with the OSC tech that has been long in dev.
Indeed, there's a continuous noticeable improvement on the core mechanics in Alpha 3.2 PTU in several aspects, what is a good thing systems continue to improve to meet expectations.
Especially more waiting to see is Alpha 3.3 that is the most important step to be taken this year, with the OSC tech that has been long in dev.
Sure thing, if the core tech of the game is not finished and polished enough, everything put over it (the normal feature-set) will always face all sorts of problems, kinda like what happened with ESO when it released, and what happened with Bless recently, and when you compare to Bless devs you notice this different approaches, while SC devs delay but refactor core problems to develop new tech to deal with issues, Bless devs applied bandages everywhere to get it to a releasable state, needless to say how that worked out.
@rpmcmurphy buying ships in-game won't happen first and reasonably so, in one alpha that wipes every few months it would be insanity to have grind for ships just to do it again on a loop every new update.
As it was said what is being worked on, is the ability to rent ships, what to me is a better solution for now as it would allow access to ships quicker and won't be much of one annoyance in the face of the data wipes or the grind-to-own.
At the moment it shows the work is on moving the whole ability to buy ship parts in-game, that seems to be related work to ships as well as things that until now were locked to the ownership of the item on the website.
@Octagon7711@rpmcmurphy ;what more do you want? They have shown a slice of SQ42 in Citizencon last year, you seen how the story flows and how it plays to some extent.
I mean you realize that SQ42 is built on the same mechanics of the PU as well, so the full open-dev of the PU already shows what to expect from SQ42 (for what is shared).... that said, what remains is SQ42 specific work, so that work should be heavy on its storyline and locations, hence the spoilers argument is most reasonable, repeating myself again, the progress we see in the PU mechanics is also the progress of SQ42 we're not talking about an entirely different game.
The real complaint is the lack of the SQ42 roadmap that has still not been publicly published, but if it does I'm not sure how it does if they work on say FPS AI as it shows on the PU Roadmap it's obviously also a SQ42 feature so I do wonder how could such cope with the public roadmap. SQ42 has also been confirmed that it won't release this year, so it shall remain locked to the PU releases through the year.
LOL If it is so reasonable not to have ship purchases in game then why would CIG say they were going to put them in? That is completely on them for setting false expectations.
And who cares if you have to repurchase them after 3 months, that's all part of testing an alpha, you expect periodic wipes, no-ones expects things to like that to be permanent.
No. The real reason they are not putting them in is to not cut off their funding, that's all there is to it. They have the REC system in place, they have aUEC earnings, they have kiosks, they could easily add a few ships but they simply choose not to.
What more do I want? I want them to stop trotting out lame excuses for not showing anything.
..And this video depicting only mining prove that CIG is delivering what Backers are asking for... Mining has been already aclaimed in his first 3.2 iteration by players. CIG is delivering big patch every quarter. Adding more gameplay (salvaging, refueling, repairing...) + 21 new ships and Planet-Size city and so much...
EA cost as much to build their company to serve us the same FPS since a decade while making billions of $... go buy BF68 if you want and don't forget the season pass
Don't get crowfunding concept? No problem just wait till Beta or release.
When exactly will either SQ42 or the main game release?
Or is the "crowd funding concept" we aren't getting is these games are never going to release?
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
@rpmcmurphy buying ships in-game won't happen first and reasonably so, in one alpha that wipes every few months it would be insanity to have grind for ships just to do it again on a loop every new update.
As it was said what is being worked on, is the ability to rent ships, what to me is a better solution for now as it would allow access to ships quicker and won't be much of one annoyance in the face of the data wipes or the grind-to-own.
At the moment it shows the work is on moving the whole ability to buy ship parts in-game, that seems to be related work to ships as well as things that until now were locked to the ownership of the item on the website.
@Octagon7711@rpmcmurphy ;what more do you want? They have shown a slice of SQ42 in Citizencon last year, you seen how the story flows and how it plays to some extent.
I mean you realize that SQ42 is built on the same mechanics of the PU as well, so the full open-dev of the PU already shows what to expect from SQ42 (for what is shared).... that said, what remains is SQ42 specific work, so that work should be heavy on its storyline and locations, hence the spoilers argument is most reasonable, repeating myself again, the progress we see in the PU mechanics is also the progress of SQ42 we're not talking about an entirely different game.
The real complaint is the lack of the SQ42 roadmap that has still not been publicly published, but if it does I'm not sure how it does if they work on say FPS AI as it shows on the PU Roadmap it's obviously also a SQ42 feature so I do wonder how could such cope with the public roadmap. SQ42 has also been confirmed that it won't release this year, so it shall remain locked to the PU releases through the year.
It wont release this year, it wont release next year. 2020 if we want to take a total SWAG and even that looks optimistic
My guess is its never going to launch, at least not until the player funnels of free money shut down.
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
..And this video depicting only mining prove that CIG is delivering what Backers are asking for... Mining has been already aclaimed in his first 3.2 iteration by players. CIG is delivering big patch every quarter. Adding more gameplay (salvaging, refueling, repairing...) + 21 new ships and Planet-Size city and so much...
EA cost as much to build their company to serve us the same FPS since a decade while making billions of $... go buy BF68 if you want and don't forget the season pass
Don't get crowfunding concept? No problem just wait till Beta or release.
When exactly will either SQ42 or the main game release?
Or is the "crowd funding concept" we aren't getting is these games are never going to release?
Well when you think about Early Access none of the indie MMOs are going to get released, not with a proper launch anyway. They will stay in a development process while being paid for and played.
That gets them over the here and now problem of generating funds, but just sets up the medium term problem of players getting bored quickly because the game is not finished. Will those players come back, well if SotA is anything to go by I doubt it?
If SC gets a beta that will be a good sign, but until we see that done I would not hold your breath.
When we initially set out on this journey we looked out at the gaming landscape and asked: can we do better? We continue to ask that question about everything we do. As a result, we will ALWAYS extend timelines or re-do features and content if we do not feel they are up to our standards. The freedom to fight for a new level of quality in game development is what crowd funding has allowed us to do, and we will continue to fight to make sure Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are the best possible games they can be.
A bit like what CCP said about Cyberpunk who's announcement was in 2012
When?
When we told you we would only release the game when it’s ready we meant it. We’re definatley much, much closer to a release date than we were back then , but it’s still not the time to confirm anything, so patience is still required. Quality is the only thing that drives us - it’s the beauty of being an independent studio and your own publisher.
Or other ambitious games like Beyond Good & Evil 2 still in development for years and with no release date in sight.
They get that the majority of gamer's are a fickle bunch who don't really care about how hard or how long a game takes to develop, they just want to know when it comes out and if their platform of choice can run it.
They have the easiest part of the bargain, just wait, they don't have to do anything else, just wait, play other games and enjoy life.
That's all fine Babyunix but let's not forget that it is only CIG who give out the ETAs, Chris has repeatedly said that people will be able to play Chapter 1 of Sq42 later in the year, or next year etc. He has said that in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 so any noise or disappointment lies purely at their feet.
Cyberpunk may have been announced in 2012 but development team size was very small until mid 2016, also they are not crowdfunding or taking pre-orders, a rather large difference.
LOL If it is so reasonable not to have ship purchases in game then why would CIG say they were going to put them in? That is completely on them for setting false expectations.
And who cares if you have to repurchase them after 3 months, that's all part of testing an alpha, you expect periodic wipes, no-ones expects things to like that to be permanent.
No. The real reason they are not putting them in is to not cut off their funding, that's all there is to it. They have the REC system in place, they have aUEC earnings, they have kiosks, they could easily add a few ships but they simply choose not to.
What more do I want? I want them to stop trotting out lame excuses for not showing anything.
Because they are going to put them in?
Buying the whole ship on a reality of wipes every few months would surely be quite grindy, there wouldn't be much testing if most of the time you were just grinding UEC to buy the ship to perhaps do mining or salvaging, etc... The ability to rent them coming first does allow for a quick access to the ships to all players to play through what they want, and I think that works better.
You say that is the reason but if we look at it the ship components still weren't added to the in-game shopping, in fact there are new revenue streams on the funding debate because they are also to add UEC itself in-game.
"not showing anything", now you just are unreasonable, may I appeal to logic for a second here? If so let's just consider a quick and simple example, when they are showing things like FPS AI, they are showing the progress of SQ42 as well, it might be a feature on the PU roadmap but it surely is part of the game, so many features are even shown with SQ42 assets on SC updates, when one comes saying "OMG no spoilers excuses for no progress!", it comes only from those who fail to consider that, when you see the mechanics of SC you see the mechanics of SQ42, so what else could they show that wouldn't involve spoiling more storyline, characters or its environments?
That's all fine Babyunix but let's not forget that it is only CIG who give out the ETAs, Chris has repeatedly said that people will be able to play Chapter 1 of Sq42 later in the year, or next year etc. He has said that in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 so any noise or disappointment lies purely at their feet.
Cyberpunk may have been announced in 2012 but development team size was very small until mid 2016, also they are not crowdfunding or taking pre-orders, a rather large difference.
ETA = Estimated Time of Arrival
Emphasis on Estimated, every estimated is based on predictions and yes Chris might be optimistic and even irrealistic but I believe it's priority's are in the right place!
Nothing is written in stone in game development, things change all the time, it's their game an ultimately they can change any date they wish so. We see games from major studios changing release dates all the time, we see it even more with kickstarted ventures. It's the nature of the beast.
The only thing that forces companies to release games early is usually monetary restraints / marketing obligations or to release before a competing game.
LOL If it is so reasonable not to have ship purchases in game then why would CIG say they were going to put them in? That is completely on them for setting false expectations.
And who cares if you have to repurchase them after 3 months, that's all part of testing an alpha, you expect periodic wipes, no-ones expects things to like that to be permanent.
No. The real reason they are not putting them in is to not cut off their funding, that's all there is to it. They have the REC system in place, they have aUEC earnings, they have kiosks, they could easily add a few ships but they simply choose not to.
What more do I want? I want them to stop trotting out lame excuses for not showing anything.
Because they are going to put them in?
Buying the whole ship on a reality of wipes every few months would surely be quite grindy, there wouldn't be much testing if most of the time you were just grinding UEC to buy the ship to perhaps do mining or salvaging, etc... The ability to rent them coming first does allow for a quick access to the ships to all players to play through what they want, and I think that works better.
You say that is the reason but if we look at it the ship components still weren't added to the in-game shopping, in fact there are new revenue streams on the funding debate because they are also to add UEC itself in-game.
"not showing anything", now you just are unreasonable, may I appeal to logic for a second here? If so let's just consider a quick and simple example, when they are showing things like FPS AI, they are showing the progress of SQ42 as well, it might be a feature on the PU roadmap but it surely is part of the game, so many features are even shown with SQ42 assets on SC updates, when one comes saying "OMG no spoilers excuses for no progress!", it comes only from those who fail to consider that, when you see the mechanics of SC you see the mechanics of SQ42, so what else could they show that wouldn't involve spoiling more storyline, characters or its environments?
Do people complain about having to rebuy things with REC and why is that any different to aUEC?
They could simply use a multiplier so that ships are affordable, ie make them 10x less than the anticipated final selling price, it would remove the grind but that's less of a concern anyway if you're only grinding for a ship every 3 months.
LOL that if you see SC then you are also seeing Sq42, what sort of noncey mental gymnastics is that?
That's all fine Babyunix but let's not forget that it is only CIG who give out the ETAs, Chris has repeatedly said that people will be able to play Chapter 1 of Sq42 later in the year, or next year etc. He has said that in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 so any noise or disappointment lies purely at their feet.
Cyberpunk may have been announced in 2012 but development team size was very small until mid 2016, also they are not crowdfunding or taking pre-orders, a rather large difference.
ETA = Estimated Time of Arrival
Emphasis on Estimated, every estimated is based on predictions and yes Chris might be optimistic and even irrealistic but I believe it's priority's are in the right place!
Nothing is written in stone in game development, things change all the time, it's their game an ultimately they can change any date they wish so. We see games from major studios changing release dates all the time, we see it even more with kickstarted ventures. It's the nature of the beast.
The only thing that forces companies to release games early is usually monetary restraints / marketing obligations or to release before a competing game.
Indeed it stands for estimated time of arrival but getting it wrong year after year does not somehow make it ok....
They changed their aproach to deploy patches with whatever is ready instead of waiting for all the features to reach readyness. Progress is more palpable because we can play test features sooner.
And it will only get easier and faster as time goes.
Every ship is available to test on the ptu which is where it matters the most now at this stage of development.
Patient is all you need. Like you say when people cry about atmospheric planets or space legs in elite. Let the devs do their thing. It will be ready when it's ready.
Buying the whole ship on a reality of wipes every few months would surely be quite grindy, there wouldn't be much testing if most of the time you were just grinding UEC to buy the ship to perhaps do mining or salvaging, etc... The ability to rent them coming first does allow for a quick access to the ships to all players to play through what they want, and I think that works better.
You say that is the reason but if we look at it the ship components still weren't added to the in-game shopping, in fact there are new revenue streams on the funding debate because they are also to add UEC itself in-game.
"not showing anything", now you just are unreasonable, may I appeal to logic for a second here? If so let's just consider a quick and simple example, when they are showing things like FPS AI, they are showing the progress of SQ42 as well, it might be a feature on the PU roadmap but it surely is part of the game, so many features are even shown with SQ42 assets on SC updates, when one comes saying "OMG no spoilers excuses for no progress!", it comes only from those who fail to consider that, when you see the mechanics of SC you see the mechanics of SQ42, so what else could they show that wouldn't involve spoiling more storyline, characters or its environments?
Do people complain about having to rebuy things with REC and why is that any different to aUEC?
They could simply use a multiplier so that ships are affordable, ie make them 10x less than the anticipated final selling price, it would remove the grind but that's less of a concern anyway if you're only grinding for a ship every 3 months.
LOL that if you see SC then you are also seeing Sq42, what sort of noncey mental gymnastics is that?
REC is Arena Commander and that is something far more superficial, with ships it still acts like renting so you don't really lose something because it was a temporary access in the first place; this is what I was mentioning as the same logic for the PU for now.
This because from what is said the renting mechanic is actually meant to be part of the actual game, and if they look for balance vs grind I would say that is one approach to having X thing intended as one expensive to get item vs the daunting grind until you could earn enough to get it.
Mental gymnastics or logic? I gave you one of many examples, when they show the ongoing work on the FPS AI mechanic, doesn't that also make SQ42 progress? If both games share those same mechanics, then to me the progress reported on those shared mechanics is progress shown for both SC and SQ42.
That's all fine Babyunix but let's not forget that it is only CIG who give out the ETAs, Chris has repeatedly said that people will be able to play Chapter 1 of Sq42 later in the year, or next year etc. He has said that in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 so any noise or disappointment lies purely at their feet.
Cyberpunk may have been announced in 2012 but development team size was very small until mid 2016, also they are not crowdfunding or taking pre-orders, a rather large difference.
ETA = Estimated Time of Arrival
Emphasis on Estimated, every estimated is based on predictions and yes Chris might be optimistic and even irrealistic but I believe it's priority's are in the right place!
Nothing is written in stone in game development, things change all the time, it's their game an ultimately they can change any date they wish so. We see games from major studios changing release dates all the time, we see it even more with kickstarted ventures. It's the nature of the beast.
The only thing that forces companies to release games early is usually monetary restraints / marketing obligations or to release before a competing game.
Estimated, LOL.
5+ years later and still no release date in sight...
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
That's all fine Babyunix but let's not forget that it is only CIG who give out the ETAs, Chris has repeatedly said that people will be able to play Chapter 1 of Sq42 later in the year, or next year etc. He has said that in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 so any noise or disappointment lies purely at their feet.
Cyberpunk may have been announced in 2012 but development team size was very small until mid 2016, also they are not crowdfunding or taking pre-orders, a rather large difference.
ETA = Estimated Time of Arrival
Emphasis on Estimated, every estimated is based on predictions and yes Chris might be optimistic and even irrealistic but I believe it's priority's are in the right place!
Nothing is written in stone in game development, things change all the time, it's their game an ultimately they can change any date they wish so. We see games from major studios changing release dates all the time, we see it even more with kickstarted ventures. It's the nature of the beast.
The only thing that forces companies to release games early is usually monetary restraints / marketing obligations or to release before a competing game.
Estimated, LOL.
5+ years later and still no release date in sight...
So same as Cyberpunk, BeyondGood &Evil , Mount&Blade and many others right...
Bitching like spoiled brats wont make it come out faster either...
But dont worry when games are ready they have ways to tell you so that you wont miss it!
Regular games have oversight that keeps and eye on development time and keeps them from going over budget and into eternal development phases. Crowdfunding games can stretch out development as long as the money is rolling in. The question is how long is too long; a 5, 10, 20 year development cycle? The problem with 'it's done when it's done' is that it becomes easy to not finish the game at all and to leave it in eternal alpha. After all what is the incentive to even finish a game when you have supporters saying take your time and it's done when it's done?
"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
Regular games have oversight that keeps and eye on development time and keeps them from going over budget and into eternal development phases. Crowdfunding games can stretch out development as long as the money is rolling in. The question is how long is too long; a 5, 10, 20 year development cycle? The problem with 'it's done when it's done' is that it becomes easy to not finish the game at all and to leave it in eternal alpha. After all what is the incentive to even finish a game when you have supporters saying take your time and it's done when it's done?
However, let Blizzard say it done when it's done, with WoW or Diablo and it is perfectly fine. "Gamer's" double standards at it's finest.
That's all fine Babyunix but let's not forget that it is only CIG who give out the ETAs, Chris has repeatedly said that people will be able to play Chapter 1 of Sq42 later in the year, or next year etc. He has said that in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 so any noise or disappointment lies purely at their feet.
Cyberpunk may have been announced in 2012 but development team size was very small until mid 2016, also they are not crowdfunding or taking pre-orders, a rather large difference.
ETA = Estimated Time of Arrival
Emphasis on Estimated, every estimated is based on predictions and yes Chris might be optimistic and even irrealistic but I believe it's priority's are in the right place!
Nothing is written in stone in game development, things change all the time, it's their game an ultimately they can change any date they wish so. We see games from major studios changing release dates all the time, we see it even more with kickstarted ventures. It's the nature of the beast.
The only thing that forces companies to release games early is usually monetary restraints / marketing obligations or to release before a competing game.
Estimated, LOL.
5+ years later and still no release date in sight...
So same as Cyberpunk, BeyondGood &Evil , Mount&Blade and many others right...
Bitching like spoiled brats wont make it come out faster either...
But dont worry when games are ready they have ways to tell you so that you wont miss it!
Extreme first world problems...sight
Did they all give multiple release dates and miss them all, so much so that they don't even bother with release dates anymore after 5+ years of not hitting them?
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Comments
Indeed, there's a continuous noticeable improvement on the core mechanics in Alpha 3.2 PTU in several aspects, what is a good thing systems continue to improve to meet expectations.
Especially more waiting to see is Alpha 3.3 that is the most important step to be taken this year, with the OSC tech that has been long in dev.
LOL If it is so reasonable not to have ship purchases in game then why would CIG say they were going to put them in? That is completely on them for setting false expectations.
And who cares if you have to repurchase them after 3 months, that's all part of testing an alpha, you expect periodic wipes, no-ones expects things to like that to be permanent.
No. The real reason they are not putting them in is to not cut off their funding, that's all there is to it. They have the REC system in place, they have aUEC earnings, they have kiosks, they could easily add a few ships but they simply choose not to.
What more do I want? I want them to stop trotting out lame excuses for not showing anything.
When exactly will either SQ42 or the main game release? Or is the "crowd funding concept" we aren't getting is these games are never going to release?
"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
It wont release this year, it wont release next year. 2020 if we want to take a total SWAG and even that looks optimistic
My guess is its never going to launch, at least not until the player funnels of free money shut down.
No end in site to that either....so who knows?
"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
That gets them over the here and now problem of generating funds, but just sets up the medium term problem of players getting bored quickly because the game is not finished. Will those players come back, well if SotA is anything to go by I doubt it?
If SC gets a beta that will be a good sign, but until we see that done I would not hold your breath.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/roadmap/board/1-Star-Citizen/info
Quality will always be our number one goal.
When we initially set out on this journey we looked out at the gaming landscape and asked: can we do better? We continue to ask that question about everything we do. As a result, we will ALWAYS extend timelines or re-do features and content if we do not feel they are up to our standards. The freedom to fight for a new level of quality in game development is what crowd funding has allowed us to do, and we will continue to fight to make sure Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are the best possible games they can be.
When?
When we told you we would only release the game when it’s ready we meant it. We’re definatley much, much closer to a release date than we were back then
Or other ambitious games like Beyond Good & Evil 2 still in development for years and with no release date in sight.
They get that the majority of gamer's are a fickle bunch who don't really care about how hard or how long a game takes to develop, they just want to know when it comes out and if their platform of choice can run it.
They have the easiest part of the bargain, just wait, they don't have to do anything else, just wait, play other games and enjoy life.
Try it, it's not that hard really.
Cyberpunk may have been announced in 2012 but development team size was very small until mid 2016, also they are not crowdfunding or taking pre-orders, a rather large difference.
Buying the whole ship on a reality of wipes every few months would surely be quite grindy, there wouldn't be much testing if most of the time you were just grinding UEC to buy the ship to perhaps do mining or salvaging, etc... The ability to rent them coming first does allow for a quick access to the ships to all players to play through what they want, and I think that works better.
You say that is the reason but if we look at it the ship components still weren't added to the in-game shopping, in fact there are new revenue streams on the funding debate because they are also to add UEC itself in-game.
"not showing anything", now you just are unreasonable, may I appeal to logic for a second here? If so let's just consider a quick and simple example, when they are showing things like FPS AI, they are showing the progress of SQ42 as well, it might be a feature on the PU roadmap but it surely is part of the game, so many features are even shown with SQ42 assets on SC updates, when one comes saying "OMG no spoilers excuses for no progress!", it comes only from those who fail to consider that, when you see the mechanics of SC you see the mechanics of SQ42, so what else could they show that wouldn't involve spoiling more storyline, characters or its environments?
Emphasis on Estimated, every estimated is based on predictions and yes Chris might be optimistic and even irrealistic but I believe it's priority's are in the right place!
Nothing is written in stone in game development, things change all the time, it's their game an ultimately they can change any date they wish so. We see games from major studios changing release dates all the time, we see it even more with kickstarted ventures. It's the nature of the beast.
The only thing that forces companies to release games early is usually monetary restraints / marketing obligations or to release before a competing game.
Do people complain about having to rebuy things with REC and why is that any different to aUEC?
They could simply use a multiplier so that ships are affordable, ie make them 10x less than the anticipated final selling price, it would remove the grind but that's less of a concern anyway if you're only grinding for a ship every 3 months.
LOL that if you see SC then you are also seeing Sq42, what sort of noncey mental gymnastics is that?
Indeed it stands for estimated time of arrival but getting it wrong year after year does not somehow make it ok....
They changed their aproach to deploy patches with whatever is ready instead of waiting for all the features to reach readyness. Progress is more palpable because we can play test features sooner.
And it will only get easier and faster as time goes.
Every ship is available to test on the ptu which is where it matters the most now at this stage of development.
Patient is all you need. Like you say when people cry about atmospheric planets or space legs in elite. Let the devs do their thing. It will be ready when it's ready.
This because from what is said the renting mechanic is actually meant to be part of the actual game, and if they look for balance vs grind I would say that is one approach to having X thing intended as one expensive to get item vs the daunting grind until you could earn enough to get it.
Mental gymnastics or logic? I gave you one of many examples, when they show the ongoing work on the FPS AI mechanic, doesn't that also make SQ42 progress? If both games share those same mechanics, then to me the progress reported on those shared mechanics is progress shown for both SC and SQ42.
"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/Bitching like spoiled brats wont make it come out faster either...
But dont worry when games are ready they have ways to tell you so that you wont miss it!
Extreme first world problems...sight
"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
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
However, let Blizzard say it done when it's done, with WoW or Diablo and it is perfectly fine. "Gamer's" double standards at it's finest.
"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/