What a pointless, nothing article. There’s obviously nothing interesting to write about!
I cannot connect to that site at work-what’s the lowdown?
Somebody on the SC forums asked if ray tracing was going to make development easier, and the dev responsed that they’re not using it at all.
This is a nothing story, though I found this quote kind of amusing:
Feature parity for everyone else’s hardware? Isn’t Star Citizen supposed to be the game that finally doesn’t coddle to casual players with casual hardware?
What are the current minimum requirements to run this game?
According to this:
I ran it in slideshow mode on my laptop a while ago.
To clarify: they’re not currently using it and have higher priority things to work on but that dev wants to add ray tracing. Which would slow down development and Roberts loves to keep that money rolling in.
I can run it with 12GB of RAM but you need every bit of it. Below that and it won’t even let you play.
…just watched this video based on the experiences of a gamer playing the Alpha:
The game looks like a nightmare. As in, a literal nightmare. Like the sort of nightmare you wake up from screaming. Best quote: "With each void consumption giving me a surreal peek behind the curtain at just how much this world is held together with tape."The game looks so fundamentally broken.
That’s a great and hilarious video.
Heh, that video is outdated already. Automatic undocking and exiting was added to Elite: Dangerous nine days ago as part of their initiative to make the game more friendly to newbies.
youd think some consumer agency somewhere would be investigating this mess… I mean on paper it sounds like the game wing commander/freelancer fans have always wanted but ut went off the rails …
If it was ever on them…
It is basically the exact Freelancer game that Chris Roberts promsied to make, but lacked the management talent and focus to actually produce. And like Freelancer, the project has immense promise but maybe was trying to do more than was practical, but with Freelancer Microsoft eventually put their collective foot down and forced him to go while they finished the project. There is no way to do that with Star Citizen.
There’s a video around on youtube which goes into the history there and if anyone wants I can probably dig it up.
What I don’t understand (OK, ONE of the things I don’t understand), is how they could have added so much content, detail, and ambience to their world without paying any attention to the very basics. It looks like there are multiple planets worth of content, including cities. There were lots of parts of that video that would look phenomenal as still frames, but you can’t walk across a room without falling through the floor?
…I think its the perfect storm of “feature creep”, “agile on steroids”, a lack of leadership and direction and “not really having a goal or a timeline” that anyone is working too.
And this story dropped a couple of days ago:
I haven’t read it yet, so I’m guessing it sheds a bit of light on everything. I found it buried in a google news search for “Star Citizen” under a whole lot of “PR” stories about Star Citizens free week of play. In fact the Forbes article wasn’t even in the search results, I found it via thislink.
[quote=“Banquet_Bear, post:429, topic:734528”]
…just watched this video based on the experiences of a gamer playing the Alpha:
[/QUOTE]I do not buy this guy’s thesis that Star Citizen’s fundamentally broken interface somehow contributes to its atmosphere. That video is full of some pretty tortured bothsideism.
But he and I are very different people; I would be physically incapable of putting “tens of hours” into a game running that badly. I felt a headache coming on just from watching the laggy, glitchy mess that he was dealing with.
Me neither.
He makes comparisons both No Man’s Sky and Elite: Dangerous as though there is a sliding scale with these games at either end, and suggests that Star Citizen might in some way fall between them. I’d suggest that Star Citizen would be a long way past Elite on that scale of user-friendliness, even if it worked.
the Forbes article just nails it. Right here, a hole in one from 300 yards out:
One hundred percent correct. Easy crowdfunding absolutely is the reason Star Citizen has failed.
Anyone who’s ever worked in any sort of business knows that however much time and money is allocated to a project, it will all be spent. If you allocate an unlimited about of time and money, you’ll never be done. **Budgets and schedules are not the enemies of creativity; they are its allies. ** Limits on the time and money you can spend on something are what force you to make decisions, to really consider quality, to focus your thinking on the essence of what you’re trying to create. It helps, too, if you have someone who is willing and able to tell you “this fucking sucks, you should redo it.”
The danger, of course - and CIG is probably way past that - is that corporate survival instict takes over, and eventually the company’s mission changes from “we need to raise more money to make this product” to “we need to raise more money to continue existing.” Forbes nailed this too:
So at some point the primary purpose became deceiving people as to the readiness of the game in order to improve liquidity.
I am 90% convinced that had Roberts been given a budget with an absolute hard cap of $150 million ,a hard schedule of four years to make a great game, and a boss willing to give him the this-fucking-sucks feedback, there would be a great game for everyone to play by now.
Yeah, Roberts isn’t a manager. Most creative types aren’t. What they need to get this game finished is some sort of EA middle manager to come in and crack the whip.