Chris Roberts Back in your wallet - STAR CITIZEN

[schild]

Yes, there's a term for what Star Citizen is. It's called a con.

[Draegan]

Yes, there's a term for what Star Citizen is. It's called a con.

Con gives them too much credit. It's TV evangelism. If that's a word.

[Lucas]

Yes, there's a term for what Star Citizen is. It's called a con.

Con gives them too much credit. It's TV evangelism. If that's a word.

Hallelujah! (NSFW)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me2H7Ja93Wg

[IainC]

-All of those things need to be game systems somehow. Yet none of these rubes seem to care? Like if you wanna buy a combat ship so you can be a wolf for those first few weeks(?) and pwn noobs. Fine I guess. But who the fuck are these people buying farming ships or Info smuggling ships when there is zero sign those are going to be actual fun and functional game systems?

Yeah, that kind of stuck out to me, too, with the "LOL SPACE WEED" thing.  Like, is managing your character's hunger actually a thing in this game?  I haven't really heard much about that aspect so far.  Like it's Space DayZ or something?  Because a yes/no answer there would make farms either the most important strategic assets in the game or completely useless.

Remember that they have a drink mixing minigame and a mechanic where you have to replace burnt out entertainment systems on passenger ships. The whole concept of scope is an alien world to them.

[Rendakor]

Yes, there's a term for what Star Citizen is. It's called a con.

Con gives them too much credit. It's TV evangelism. If that's a word.

Televangelism.

[rattran]

Yes, there's a term for what Star Citizen is. It's called a con.

Con gives them too much credit. It's TV evangelism. If that's a word.

Televangelism.

Alternately "Evil"

[squirrel]

-All of those things need to be game systems somehow. Yet none of these rubes seem to care? Like if you wanna buy a combat ship so you can be a wolf for those first few weeks(?) and pwn noobs. Fine I guess. But who the fuck are these people buying farming ships or Info smuggling ships when there is zero sign those are going to be actual fun and functional game systems?

Yeah, that kind of stuck out to me, too, with the "LOL SPACE WEED" thing.  Like, is managing your character's hunger actually a thing in this game?  I haven't really heard much about that aspect so far.  Like it's Space DayZ or something?  Because a yes/no answer there would make farms either the most important strategic assets in the game or completely useless.

Remember that they have a drink mixing minigame and a mechanic where you have to replace burnt out entertainment systems on passenger ships. The whole concept of scope is an alien world to them.

I'd love to see the design doc on this thing, I mean how many systems are still to be even remotley tested? Mini games, economy, crafting, you know just the small shit. Who am I kidding, there's no design doc, there's no design. Just whatever the fuck Crobberts thinks is cool and got a yes/stretch goal. Of course what's cool has changed so everything gets redone constantly. The only thing that hasn't changed is the basic premise of spaceships in space with some snooty man bits. And what has the public seen so far? This thing is so fucked it's going to create its own lexicon in the industry. It's going to make Duke Nukem look like a project that had minor issues with pushing dates. It's awesome.

[UnSub]

A big issue is how all those systems - assuming they actually get developed - actually fit together.

So, you can board a ship. Great. But is it actually workable? Is it too easy to do and then take control of a ship, making it overpowered, or too hard and not worth bothering with? If the rewards are better to just blow up a ship, then that's what will happen.

So while it's great that such systems exist, balancing has to occur to make it worthwhile or you end up with an unused mechanic that took time and effort to create.

And there will be quite a few people who'll say they pre-funded the game / bought the game because of whatever feature that was promised and then turned out to be a terrible idea.

Assuming that system actually makes it in-game.

[Malakili]

This has always been the problem with the game. The real fanatics aren't treating it like a game, they are treating it like a VR simulation or something. We know games don't work that way, but stuff like bugs, clunky mechanics, etc. are going to be a problem here.  I don't know how much the farming ship cost people, but its going to be a rude awakening when someone does the math later, creates a spreadsheet, and finds out farming is actually just not an efficient way to play the game. So much for that $300 (or whatever) ship you bought, it sucks.

[Sky]

The real question here is why hasn't Molyneux been brought on board?

[IainC]

The real question here is why hasn't Molyneux been brought on board?

Because they need to keep the scope under control.

[Samprimary]

at this point they could bring in molyneaux to tone the scope down

[Speedy Cerviche]

This has always been the problem with the game. The real fanatics aren't treating it like a game, they are treating it like a VR simulation or something. We know games don't work that way, but stuff like bugs, clunky mechanics, etc. are going to be a problem here.  I don't know how much the farming ship cost people, but its going to be a rude awakening when someone does the math later, creates a spreadsheet, and finds out farming is actually just not an efficient way to play the game. So much for that $300 (or whatever) ship you bought, it sucks.

PvP in these type of games also comes down to efficiency. As long as there is some kind of skill factor in the game (it's not completely based on hard character power) People always find some kind of very stripped down but still very deadly character/equipment/ship design to inflict maximum damage with downside minimum risk. You had it in games like UO with naked mages, you had it in games like Eve with small newbie ships "tackling". All these people who spent big $ on fancy ships are inevitably going to be disappointed by their relative performance.

[Pennilenko]

Star Citizen Patch 2.3 First Impressions

Looks like things are going well. 

[Mithas]

I watched all six minutes and forty-seven seconds. They are not doing themselves any favors by letting people play this.

[Sky]

I watched all six minutes and forty-seven seconds.

Worth it.

[Ginaz]

Star Citizen Patch 2.3 First Impressions

Looks like things are going well. 

I'm now looking forward to seeing Goat Simulator: Goats in Space.

[ezrast]

Dang, that guy gets way better performance than I did.

[Ironwood]

In fairness, that's a nice looking catastrophe.

[Khaldun]

So I almost think after watching that this isn't just in a simple sense a con--a cynical, self-knowing attempt to get people to give you something for nothing and to walk away smiling afterwards. There's certainly some aspect of it where the SC people are taking in money and burning it carelessly. But they also just seem to me, looking back, to be almost like helpless toddlers who are breathlessly telling a parent about all the cool things that they're imagining, "And there's a dinosaur! And he fights Batman! And then Batman grows machine arms! And two spaceships come to say hello to him! But then there's a volcano! Only of ice!"

It's like a game development process crossed with Axe Cop. When I see that video I think, "If these guys had had some discipline, and kept the focus manageable, they might have made a functioning game by now." The fact that they didn't has to do with their own immaturity and on the cynical side, with the fact that they got addicted to getting yet more wads of consequence-free money every time they promised a new feature. But I am almost tempted to slight sympathy the longer this goes on.

[Bungee]

I "designed" a Star Trek game on the ST:Armada forums back then. Something we thought a ST game should be like as 13 year olds. I think Chris found our Word docs and hired some more 13 year olds to come up with more of that awesomesauce.

[Lucas]

I "designed" a Star Trek game on the ST:Armada forums back then. Something we thought a ST game should be like as 13 year olds. I think Chris found our Word docs and hired some more 13 year olds to come up with more of that awesomesauce.

I played Star Trek: The Rebel Universe for the Atari ST and survived the experience. I'm sure your game couldn't be worse than that.

[jakonovski]

Reading the comments, the physics are like that because the game takes physics rules from a client side file. So everyone in a multiplayer session can have their own physics ruleset and the video is what results.

Amazing.

[MahrinSkel]

Reading the comments, the physics are like that because the game takes physics rules from a client side file. So everyone in a multiplayer session can have their own physics ruleset and the video is what results.

Amazing.

Da fuq?

[Kail]

I'm not sure that's right (or at least, not the issue here, lots of people seem to be saying shit they don't understand as per the usual Youtube comments section)

The author's follow up video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLkgkJitE6c

[jakonovski]

All I really know is that this is great entertainment. 

[Malakili]

Regardless of the degree, this is exactly the problem with these kinds of games that try to go too detailed at the moment. Physics are really hard to get right and if the expectation is "realistic" then you notice even all the little things that don't work quite right, let alone the big goofy stuff like the spaceship in that video.

Any one of the things they are trying to do is a whole game. Getting it to all interact in a way that makes any kind of sense seems very ambitious to me and entirely likely to fall apart, even if you assume total good faith in the development team.

[squirrel]

Reading the comments, the physics are like that because the game takes physics rules from a client side file. So everyone in a multiplayer session can have their own physics ruleset and the video is what results.

Amazing.

Da fuq?

Nah that's just star Shitizen rationalization - their defence is the author fucked with local config files so the display he sees is crazy fucked up when in fact it's fine for other players. The author of that video - Peter Gabriel / Major Tom - posts frequently in the SA thread and debunked the .cfg theory, although in some ways that would be the even funnier explanation.

[KallDrexx]

What's even more awesome is the comments on that video, because the defenders seem to insinuate that it's not the game that's fucked, it's because physics are all client side and people are messing with their configuration files thus messing up the physics for everyone else.

No idea if it's true (don't care enough to research further) but if so that's pretty 

[Bungee]

What's even more awesome is the comments on that video, because the defenders seem to insinuate that it's not the game that's fucked, it's because physics are all client side and people are messing with their configuration files thus messing up the physics for everyone else.

No idea if it's true (don't care enough to research further) but if so that's pretty  

People need to read more.

[Samprimary]

What's even more awesome is the comments on that video, because the defenders seem to insinuate that it's not the game that's fucked, it's because physics are all client side and people are messing with their configuration files thus messing up the physics for everyone else.

No idea if it's true (don't care enough to research further) but if so that's pretty  

People need to read more.

they'll end up reading dianetics

[KallDrexx]

My bad, I missed the follow up video link

[Margalis]

Chris Roberts is someone who has not been in the video game industry for 20 years. That's a long fucking time in this industry. He's an "idea guy" with super deep wallets, but how to actually build a game seems beyond him.

It's cool when you get a rare case like George Miller directing the new Mad Max - out of the game for a long time, comes back not missing a step. But in most cases when people haven't worked in 20 years there's a reason, and even if incompetence isn't the reason (it usually is) time will probably have passed them by.

As far as looking nice - video game artists are really fucking good at making things look pretty, especially if they don't have to worry much about performance, constraints, bugs, etc. This may be a broad generalization but the typical video game artist is much more competent than the typical programmer. Maybe that's because programming is harder (I dunno - I struggle to model an apple in blender so art seems hard to me!) but if you unleash professional video game artists they will almost always make something that looks good, whereas unleashed programmers will often create a mess.

This is why target renders and early vertical slices and such of games are so useless. A competent art team can produce a great looking vertical slice. They don't even have to be a great art team, just competent.

[Sky]

The rise of game (and video digital effects) concepting has been bringing representative painting back into the forefront. It's amazingly awesome (as someone who favors representational art) to see something finally pushing back on modern art.

[Jeff Kelly]

George Miller was never out of the game. The biggest gap between engagements was 8 years between Babe 2 and Happy Feet which is actually not that much by Hollywood timeframes (especially considering the fact that he was 54 when he made Babe 2 and 61 when he made Happy feet). Miller was also always an exceptional producer and director that has been nominated for and won multiple awards. He's also generally well liked by studios, distributors, actors and staff and he delivers on time and on budget and his movies do exceptionally well at the box office.

TL;DR: He has nothing in common with Chris Roberts.

Chris Roberts is legendary for being a "pie in the sky" idea guy that doesn't deliver on time or on budget (or at all). Roberts management and production antics have been instrumental in the Death of Origin Systems. His people management skills are also legendarily bad. There's a reason no one wanted to work with Roberts ever again and the stories about his management style, character and business acumen are legion. They are also universally negative. If the topic comes to Roberts amongs industry people - on record - the reaction is almost always along the lines of "fuck that guy".