all 27 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 16 points 1 day ago (1 child)

I couldn’t care less how many features get added at this point. If the game still plays like shit, it’s not fun. Quit a long time ago because of this. I got so sick of how disconnected you feel from the UI / game. It constantly drops inputs, fails to register anything, crashes, just an abysmal online experience.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 12 hours ago

    The game is also a huge mess with identity crisis and no clear direction. Not to mention the big mismanagement issues and toxic workspace. Been following the development of this game for years and despite the potential and accomplishments the management doesn't make it seem like the game has a bright future. Recently I've encountered news that they banned trading ships between users because they don't make money from it when years before it was advertised that the ships you buy now you can trade with others later so it's not a waste of money. Lmao

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 1 day ago (17 children)

    I wonder for how many more years people will continue to not only accept that scam but also wholeheartedly defending it.

    such as procedural world-building

    So no longer “it takes time to build planets”? Just slap on some algorithmic generation and call it a day?

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    You'd think they'd have caught wind of something when they introduced purchasable ships. And most notably their pricing.

    And you don't even own the ship, as usual you just own a licence to use it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Weren't those in since the very beginning?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 13 hours ago

    I'm not really defending the game, but i bought a ship like a decade ago during a kickstarter promo or something. I "played" the game maybe once a year ever since then. I got my money out of it a long time ago. The game isn't great. It's probably not even good, but i have never seen anytging like it. It looks insane, (runs rather poor) the space flight sim part is fantastic. The ship detail is something that hasn't been there before and will never been seen again. (Makes sense, since that's where their money goes). People are really nice in the game, and i had the best interactions i ever had in any game.

    Long story short, i hate what happens to a game that i generally like, and the idea behind it. The amount of money put into is bizzare. On the other hand, there are "real" scam games, that made 250 million dollars and are genuinely just unreal engine 5 assets scattered around, with no game in sight, and generally people don't talk about it the same way they talk about star citizen.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (9 children)

    I really don't see it as a scam. I think I paid $30 for the game and they're continuing to develop it. I've played it a bit and while it definitely feels unfinished, I'd say they're certainly onto something, it has serious potential to turn into something cool.

    such as procedural world-building

    So no longer “it takes time to build planets”? Just slap on some algorithmic generation and call it a day?

    So one thing to mention here, these planets exist at a nearly realistic scale, most a have about a 2000 km diameter, which puts their surface area around 12,600,000 square km. You can't sculpt every inch of that by hand and make it look good, you just can't. At some point you need to leverage procedural methods to fill in the space between crafted areas.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 hours ago (8 children)

    The "scam" thing is just a meme people repeat because they think it's important to have an opinion about SC and that's the only one they've ever heard. And yeah, it really doesn't make any sense. There so many actual valid things you could criticize about the game and the company making it. I could make you a list but we'd be here all day.

    But objectively, scam is literally the only complaint that is instantly disprovable, because you can log in and play the game and see that they put the work into it. It's a buggy mess, they desperately need a proper UX lead, the project is atrociously mismanaged, but like... They did the work. As a scam, it would be the worst scam in history; you're supposed to run away with the money, not actually spend it making a game.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 hours ago

    As a scam, it would be the worst scam in history; you're supposed to run away with the money, not actually spend it making a game.

    I think you nailed it right there. That's the thing.

    They are making a game. And as long as people keep supporting that effort, they're gonna keep doing it. I think that's pretty straight forward!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 7 hours ago (6 children)

    There is no possible way the majority of the money is going into the game. It's simply not plausible.

    And moreover both things can be true, it can be a scam where the leadership is pocketing most of the money and also a decent game locked in production forever simply to make more money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 hours ago (5 children)

    So here's what I don't get... CIG is a notoriously mismanaged company running an incredibly bloated game that has been feature-creeped beyond all recognition from its original pitch, run by a self-important auteur egomaniac who frequently costs the company time (and therefore money) by exercising a truly obsessive level of control over every single aspect of the game's development...

    ... And they're also so shockingly good at everything they do, so efficient, so clever and smart that they can spend 13 years very publicly producing a ridiculously high concept, broadly scoped, overly ambitious money pit of an MMO, whilst actually secretly siphoning off the majority of the money they've received into their own personal accounts. They are, in fact, so good at this that they can make a game bigger and more complex than GTA 6, on the same kind of budget, whilst actually needing to only spend a fraction of that budget on the actual game development, and they're so good in fact that they can do all of that whilst convincingly running the pretense of being a shockingly mismanaged company.

    Do I have that right?

    Look, I get the urge to turn everything into a conspiracy, but bro, it ain't that deep. They're just a bunch of nerds with bad people skills and a lot of money to burn.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 hours ago (4 children)

    Correct.

    14 years of development does not imply good or efficient. There's no secret about it, keeping it on permanent development gives them a job for as long as they can keep the grift going. You're implying everyone thinks the game is good, worthwhile or innovative, I do not agree on most of those points. That said again both things can be true.

    No, you've added your opinion and tried to pass it off as objective fact.

    It doesn't need to be that deep, it's just fraud with a fan base which could be said of a lot of games just none this expensive or developed as long.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (3 children)

    14 years of development does not imply good or efficient.

    Where did I say that?

    You're implying everyone thinks the game is good, worthwhile or innovative

    Again, where did I say that?

    I'm honestly wondering if you replied to the wrong comment by mistake, because I can't see how you got any of that from what I said.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 hours ago* (2 children)

    Literally "good at everything they do" aside from stick to a release date obviously.

    All you had to do was look for the word good in your comment boss.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 hours ago (1 child)

    You mean the paragraph that was very clearly written as sarcasm to highlight the inherent contradiction in your theory? Would that be the part you're referring to?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 4 hours ago

    I do not think any of those things therefore they weren't in my argument, that's your argument at that point. It's a red herring you wrote yourself, it is odd you're confused by it though.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 7 hours ago (1 child)

    Should literally be illegal to sell a game for this long while it's still in goddamn alpha.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago

    Wait this game is still going ?

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 12 hours ago

    HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAAHA

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 30 minutes ago)

    Actually release Squadron 42 in a fully complete state, and I might start believing Chris Roberts can actually finish anything in his life without outside pressure.

  • source