Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!




Last Active
  • 3.1.0 released to the PTU

  • Star Citizen - 10 for the Chairman Series

    Babuinix said:
    Oh yeah all these studios across the world are really hurting the project , getting access to experienced Crytek Dev's including the guys who made it from scratch and allowed for seamless landings on highly detailed procedural planets and plenty of other amazing tech was a real blunder.

    When you think haters can't be more out of touch they always find ways to surprise...

    The mere fact that we are now comparing CIG/Star Citizen with the best companies in gaming who've been operating for 20+ years and releasing the best of the best is a testament of Chris Roberts brilliance in both game development and management. 

    It's one of the many open wound in the haters narrative and why they want so badly to see Star Citizen fail and see CIG collapse.

    Too bad.

    LOL I love that you try so hard.
  • Star Citizen - 10 for the Chairman Series

    CrazKanuk said:
    sgel said:


    I'd also like you to show me these plenty of games that took longer than seven years to show something and it was worse than what CIG has shown us and they also had bigger budgets.

    I bet you bring up the "but muh scope is bigger than your scope" argument at least once.

    First off, I don't know why you think that scope is not an issue with this project. What don't you explain how scope isn't a problem? Scope is actually the biggest problem with this game. Period. 

    As far as games that took this long, how about Cyberpunk 2077? It's not even of the same scope and it's taken longer to show anything, AND it was announced around the same time (2012). 

    SWTOR is another that likely took at least 6 years. I mean who knew about Bioware working on an MMO as of 2006, so that would place it at 5 years and it was, apparently, in the works before that even. 

    Some other notables that were at the 6 years or more were Star Craft 2, TF2, FFXV, D3, Morrowind, Fallout 3, Spore, STO. 

    There is a plethoria of other games that are in the 5 year mark. All of these games ARE smaller in scope to what SC is. Whatever the technical difficulty is/was, it goes to show that these limitations can sometimes be non-trivial. So whether you're creating a massive game or something simple, it can make it take longer to get the job done. 

    Also, one thing I think that people seem to use in their criticism of SC is money. Yes, CIG has lots of it. However, we are talking about multiple offices across multiple time lines, with larger teams. All of this stuff is not helpful. Go and google anything that you want on efficiency and each of these things would be on anyone's top 5 list. You might think that a larger team is better, but they actually output a smaller amount on a per-developer basis than smaller teams that are co-located and working in the same time zone. So you actually pay more for less productivity. 

    Can we even say Cyberpunk 2077 is not of the same scope considering how little is known about the game or its aspirations? :)
    What size team are working on the game? CDPR have been divided up over 3 separate games TW3 (until mid 2016), Gwent (release 2018) and CP2077 so it might be that there was a very small team working on CP2077 until mid 2016.
    Perhaps what is most important though is that it is self funded, so how long it takes is largely irrelevant to the customer and with very little info it's not like it is constantly drawing attention to itself. CIG have been writing, rewriting, rewriting, rewriting, rewriting all on the backs of other people's money with very little to show for it while also drawing massive amount of attention to itself.

    The difference between the games you listed and SC is that they produced full games in 6-7 years while SC sits at considerably less a game in comparison for the same amount of time, they don't even have 1 proper basic gameplay loop implemented after 6 years...

    I think part of the issue is CR would say idiotic stuff like "more money = more staff = bigger game = faster game", he also implied (stated?) that having studios around the world would allow for the US studio to hand over the day's work to the UK who then might hand over to DE. Any one with any semblence of a brain on their shoulders would know this would never work so why would he insult people's intelliigence like that unless he was bullshitting?

  • Star Citizen - 10 for the Chairman Series

    Babuinix said:
    So rules change if it's not a "CIG is doomed"  narrative?

    Guess who started this "opinions as facts" narrative:
    Babuinix said:
    Cmon people. Only 8k short of 180$Million. Keep it up.
    Well it's about 1/3rd of what they need to pay for monthly studio costs. So c'mon people indeed.
    We've got people shouting, preaching even wishing for CIG / Star Citizen demise for years now, using all kinds of "made up logic and facts" again and again...

    Yet here we are... :p

    That's not an opinion stated as fact. That is using Foundry 42's financials to make an informed opinion as to what costs are for CIG.

    It cost Foundry 42 £17.5 million for 221 staff, that's $23.5 million, CIG now have over twice that number of staff on their books.

    They have also said their US counterparts are considerably more expensive than their EU staff which could easily negate the tax breaks they receive from the UK therefore it is still costing them a considerable amount per month. $47 million per year for 475 staff is almost $4 million per month.

    If you want to claim the numbers are less then show it instead of resorting to ELE, "made up logic and facts", 90 days and whatever other slurs you want to throw around.
    In case you don't understand I am not saying they are running out of money, they would be laying off staff if that was the case, I am not saying 90 days, ELE or any of that crap, I am simply saying $1 million a month is woefully short for maintaining 475 staff. It was a comment to add some perspective to your celebratory "Take that haterz, CIG are rolling in it" bullcrap.

  • Star Citizen - Development Updates

    Babuinix said:
    Where do I show concern for it?
    That's pretty easy to answer, by bringing it up all the time you're displaying your "concern".

    Babuinix said:
    Lol I wish really that it can turn into a more engaging game so that it's rabid fanboys would stick to playing it instead of poluting Star Citizen threads...
    And if Star Citizen was a game then perhaps you wouldn't feel the need to jab at Elite all the time, funny how all these things can easily be reversed right. Also amusing how it's "polluting" SC threads when it was you who brought it up in the 1st place lol...

    Babuinix said:
    We had a really calm week after the new ED update released and they were busy farming credits lol...then came frontier and nerfed it to the ground so here they are again...
    So bait posts by you that get a response from 1 person (now 2 people) is somehow an indication of something more? Talk about reading far too much into things...
    Good on Frontier nerfing exploits, who wouldn't want the company doing that unless you're being immature and trying so so hard to get a little weak jab in there?
    Will you gripe about CIG nerfing exploits that allow people to earn end game ships in a single day, ones that people have paid an idiotic amount of cash for? No, of course you won't.

    Babuinix said:
    I bet that if they had space legs and ships with actuall interiors to walk on they would be exploring them all for more than a week lol
    And if you could play Star Citizen you wouldn't need to waste your time or other people's time in trying to talk crap about another game just to make yourself feel better about your game of choice.

    Your reliance on space legs is the only thing you have, you have no game, you have no progression, you have no persistence, you have no mechanics, you have no complete star systems and yet it space legs, space legs, space legs as if that somehow makes it so much better. There's a saying that fits nicely here, you can't see the forest for the trees.