Simple question - Do you think Star Citizen will deliver on release?

I think it will deliver thanks to how hands on the community is with it.

I am a day one backer of SC (£30 originally then up to £140 over 4 years) and personally if the game is even half of what it is trying to be then i will be happy, even in the tiny space of the persistant universe i have had enough emergent gaming experiences unlike any other game to make it exciting to think of the possibilities in a whole star system or a hundred, and thats even before any of the professions or the game mechanics or even content are in the game, and thats a promising sign

I would prefer for CIG to attempt the most ambitious game they can and fall short over them just delivering another unoriginal half assed game,if that means its going to take a long time im ok with that, and problems and roadblocks are more than expected in a game this size.

I will wait and see how it turns out before i start pouring my scorn upon it :P

It will be great, it is already showing that it has all of the basics down. The content is what will make it or break it!

we are talking about star citizen or SQ42? because i don't expect ver 1.0 of star citizen to have everything at launch

better question:

DO you think star citizen will ever release?

answer: No it will never. its scam to make us all fool so they can buy fancy cars and homes.

Star Citizen? LMAO

All gameplay shown thus far has been utter trash (I know, it's in the early, early stages of development...), so I kind of doubt it. But there will be a lot of barren wastelands over which the SC-"whales" can slowly and awkardly fly around their $500 ships. And those ships will look good, no doubt about it.

I was very hype for this game and i always give myself false hope that "meh. its pre alpha, final game will be much better" but its been 5 years and game is still IN PRE alpha!!. thats a bullshit. I was very excited for this game but now i dont care anymore.

in 5 years they never bother to show a proper SP footage. yet they are selling fictional ships for 10000$. selling pre alpha beta version too for a price more than AAA games.

Yeah it's pretty f'ed up. Combination of what has been achived and those prices is nauseating.

But then again maybe by some miracle it will turn out ok. But if so you could always jump on at that point.

The problem with Star Citizen is that it can never be compared apple to apple with other games.

With the amount of time it is taking to make the game, it is only fair to compare it with other big AAA games out there. And in that respect, it will most probably fail to live up to expectations. The team behind Star Citizen neither has the manpower, experience nor the resources to compete with the big boys in the industry.

If we treat it like an indie game, that's basically shifting the goal post so that a goal can be scored. And most indie games don't have the luxury of getting millions upon millions of dollars in funding.

So, however the game turns out, it will be criticized by people from either side of the camp

If you're into that sim heavy stuff, sure.

I said no but it won't matter one way or the other.

People who haven't and won't buy it are camped out waiting for its release so they can call it a failure and create a negative internet storm against it just like several other games this generation.

I think it will deliver more than anyone outside the community expects. And about 70% of the whole game that they wanted to make at release, that they will finish in over a year time after its release.

I have a feeling Squadron 42 is going to be a little disappointing though, I don't know why. I guess because it's out first.

I didn't give a cent and I think it will deliver.

All I care about is 42. The PU can only be icing if it turns out good; I'm not too concerned with it.

Squadron 42 will. Star Citizen itself? Not as sure on that.

Are you certain about their inexperience? Chris Roberts has been coding games since the late 80's. I would think he knows enough to hire an experienced team. The only thing they don't have is name recognition. That hardly means the coders are inexperienced.

Well, it is a hugely ambitious game, and there is always the fear that it's going to do the ol' Icarus-style flying too close to the sun only to crash and burn.

That being said, I wish the devs good luck. They do seem to be genuinely passionate about their game, and do seem to have a clear vision for what kind of game they want it to be. That's a step in the right direction, at least.

SQ42 might, as for Star Citizen most likely not, simply promised way too much

It's gonna be buggy as shit upon release, have less content, and ultimately end up disappointing all but the greatest fans of the game. Even if it somehow pulled off what no other company could, there will still be a large crowd who would find fault and heavily criticize the game throughout its life cycle.

There's just no winning with gamers, and no promise that won't be broken by developers.

From what I hear, the game isn't going to release. Even the devs are hinting at it.

If you are asking if it will release in a finished state, no.

It's gonna be one of those games with rolling updates gradually improving things.

It's much like asking if a Bethesda Elder Scrolls / Fallout game will release without game breaking bugs.

I hope it does but who knows. It's got some ridiculous high expectations to live up to.

I think they should not have taken so much money from people - there will probably be a lot of buyers remorse if/when it gets released.

I think it will deliver something at least worth a $60 game - that's more wishful thinking though since I haven't really been following it much.

Absolutely.

No they aren't. They just released another major content update to the game.

Like what? It seems that people who say this haven't been following the game development at all and haven't played the alpha.

The game is 4 years in development dec 2012-dec 2016.

Btw. There is a game called Cyberpunk 2077, it was announced January 2013 three month after Star Citizen and CD Project Red has still nothing to show.

The company has today 373 developers, the most other AAA studios have lesser developers for their AAA games.

And they have enough experience, because they have ex-developers from Blizzard, Crytek (Crysis), EA, ArenaNet (Guild Wars), Naughty Dog and other studios.

They have also developers from the movie industries, for instance the director of character development was the lead artist from movies like Iron Man, The Avengers, Doctor Strange and Guardians of the Galaxies 1 and 2.

They have also concept artists which worked on movies like Transformers, Star Wars, Star Trek and so on.

It's never going to live up to all of the hype that has been heaped onto it by the Internet. But that is the trend these days. Hype something like crazy and then trash it when it is released. That's pretty much what we do now.

I'm Pretty sure I will like it however and normal gamers who don't get involved in video game Internet drama will probably enjoy it too. If you can keep your head and just remember it's only a video game and not meant to change your life forever you might also get some enjoyment out of it. We can hope anyway. I'm rooting for the developers.

I think after they opened their dev timeline someone said it's closer to 30% of the features promised, assuming they are releasing a 1.0 version of SC by 2018.

2011* its been 5 years. Project planning is part of development. And I can't find it now but on the RSI website its confirmed the projected started sometime in 2011 and was funded in late 2012.

And we don't know what CD Project Red has. They are choosing to not show anything. Mostly because glorified tech demos aren't worth showing most of the time. And even 4 years still showing off pre production R&D tech demos really shows they are not far along making a game... I think a few non derek smart developers commented on this as it doesn't sound like they aren't in production of a game. Which means if something does release next year it will likely be tossed together and rushed out the door.

No, the prototype for the crowdfunding campaign was developed between 2011 and 2012, but it was made for the crowdfunding campaign and not for the game.

Its not game development time when you use nothing from the prototype for the game.

And the development of the Singleplayer campaign for Star Citizen is also behind the closed doors.

CIG develops not just one game like CD Project Red, they develop two games in the same time.

Prototyping is a very large part of game development... especially early on to get an idea of the game and planning out the rest of what needs to be done, even if they don't use the assets/code they made they still learned from the prototyping experience.. do you understand how design/engineering works at all?

The single player is leveraging the technology from SC, again, they are still producing R&D for both games basically. To believe they are able to be in full production for sq42 is stupid.

I don't see how CD project red has anything to do with it or the fact that you are basically wrong, CD project red has had multiple games in development (witcher 3 and cyberpunk... were overlapping and have nothing they can really reuse in terms of assets).

The problem with this kind of long awaited games...is to have attainable expectations!!!

The more the delay the more the expectations get bigger, and here it's gonna disappoint no matter what.

So piece of advice, keep your expectations attainable and everything gonna be fine ;)

A prototype which shows just the vision of the creator for backers has nothing to do with a game development prototype.

A development prototype has often already core features and game code.

CIG has started from zero, there is not a single code line in the game from the crowdfunding prototype.

They have nothing learned from the prototype because no code or assets are in the game.

Not to mentioned that just 3 developers of 373 developers have developed the prototype, because they have started the hiring of developers in december 2012.

It has a lot to do with CD Project Red, because CIG has started with lesser developer than CDPR in the same time frame and no one complains about the development time or what ever of Cyberpunk 2077.

Or do you think CDPR has started the development in january 2013 with one or two developers and an expensive CGI trailer?

My thoughts exactly, in what I would like to call "Spore" Syndrome.. The first game of memory that promised to be this ground breaking extensive gaming doing everything, that turned into something that was quite shallow and never living up to the hype.. Furthermore there has just been too much publicity, rather false or not, to throw doubts in how the company is being handled.. Never before have I heard so much drama and concerns come from a single studio as I have this one and that gives me pause..

To be perfectly honest I feel like I am watching the biggest train wreck of a game coming.. I have no horse in this race one way or another, but how most of the biggest crowd funders have been going I would not be surprised if this one will crash and burn too..

At this point I'm not so sure.

Taking far too long. its not about "how many years" its "how much is done in those years".

2 years clearly went down the s*itter from bad management.

.... Why the hell are people comparing these devs to CD Project Red? Cyberpunk 2077 to my knowledge is not crowdfunded and the only people they have a responsibility to are the shareholders/owners of the company.. SC.. Is crowdfunded, and backed with consumer money that they can't even get a refund any more due to a recent contract change.. Please stop comparing the two.

What has that to do with game development time?

Yes a prototype and project planning is important to prototyping and planning the project.

A development prototype has often already core features and game code.

That's an alpha, prototyping is writing something you're not sure of and may or may not be of use. Prototyping is used to test theories/concepts and see if its worth putting real development on. They spent a year working on project planning and prototyping... For instance the original goldeneye was never meant to ship with a MP, it was prototyped by 1 developer in his spare time.

CIG has started from zero, there is not a single code line in the game from the crowdfunding prototype.

Doesn't matter, thats the point of prototypes, apart from taking a concept to a testable feature, its not always going to live through the original prototype or at all. Maybe they learned a few things and took a different approach so they had to start from scratch. Had they skipped prototyping it that lesson would have been learned a year later instead.

Not to mentioned that just 3 developers of 373 developers have developed the prototype, because they have started the hiring of developers in december 2012.

Early development is always small teams. You can't give 370 people work if you don't know what you're building and don't have a plan. Think of building a sky scrapper, do you think you can hand 300 construction workers materials and they'll just start putting it together?

It has a lot to do with CD Project Red, because CIG has started with lesser developer than CDPR in the same time frame and no one complains about the development time or what ever of Cyberpunk 2077.

No body donated money to CD Project Red for a project estimated to be about 2 years for a SP campaign that was pitched like the spiritual successor to wing commander with (lets be clear not an MMO) an online MP with a persistent universe which sounded like the freelancer MP with more features.

Because the fact of the matter is we have no clue what their time table is, that is for the share holders and upper people within the company, we are not privy to that information.. We have no clue what their time table is or how many resources they put into it.. We know what they have put in SC they have a time table, etc etc.. We don't even know how big their current dev team is when it comes to the cyberpunk game.. They pitch these ideas to the SHAREHOLDERS, they have all the information in which they can shutter projects through pressure of company heads when they have doubts.. You are basically comparing a game you have absolutely no clue about the development to a publically backed game that is suppose to be extremely transparent..

@waahahah: Exactly its like people don't know the concept between a company who gets their funds through their own company or publisher vs crowd sourced.. The only way this would even remotely similar is if one of us were a shareholder of CD Project in which we had info on their project given to us in how our investment is going, than we can compare the two on whether we have doubts or not.. Pretty self explanatory. Customers do not care about said projects like Cyberpunk 2066 because they have not personally invested in it.. You can be damned sure these companies show extreme scrutiny to dev house projects, just like how the backers should be judging their investment and the promises that were made with scrutiny.

I have more hope since not everyone is as incompetent and delusional as Sean Murray but after No Man's Sky debacle, I think its hard to make a lot of grand promises and deliver on them

My God, the prototype was a scripted in-engine realtime rendered cutscene with a capital ship and fighters in a space battle, thats not a development prototype where you can already test some features.

No its not an alpha, an alpha is already the core of the game with some features like SC in the current stage.

Yeah a prototype is for the testing of features or concepts or what ever with your game code and assets, because without game code and assets you cant test concepts/theories, right?

I know.., that means there is no difference between the development of project SC and Cyberpunk 2077, just a time frame of 3 month.

Yes, but the most backers donated money for SC in the current planned scope, which costs a lot more dev time and it is bigger than Cyberpunk 2077.

So, why you complain about the dev time of SC when you have no comparison with other projects?

btw. CDPR has already more people than CIG and they want double the head count.

Quote:

Overall, CD Projekt Red has "amazingly large ambitions" for this game. To support its grand vision for Cyberpunk 2077, CD Projekt Red president Adam Kicinski said during an earnings presentation last month that the studio plans to at least double its headcount, which currently stands at around 400 people.

source:

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/cyberpunk-2077-is-more-ambitious-than-witcher-on-e/1100-6439269/

Can we stop saying a game is 'in-development' or 'not intended for the public for criticism' if they charged even a single cent for any piece of content in the game?

The picture on OP is a picture of David Braben the creator of Elite Dangerous not Chris Roberts the Star Citizen CEO. You need to fix that OP.

I don't think Star Citizen will completely deliver and I'm a backer that has already put a significant investment into Star Citizen. For me it doesn't have to deliver on all its promises at launch because even if it delivers a fraction of them it will still be great. I've played enough of the Alpha to see that there's a solid game in there. Star Citizen is fun even in its incomplete state and it will be even more fun when they add more stuff to it.

@neobone2 said:

My God, the prototype was a scripted in-engine realtime rendered cutscene with a capital ship and fighters in a space battle, thats not a development prototype where you can already test some features.

you're acting like someone who hasn't been in game development for years didn't learn anything about putting together a prototype level and render a cutscene. And you're also missing the point of the planning. These are all things that are still important. Development for the started before the kick starter campaign, if I could find it, I could show you it comes from the horse's mouth as well. Either way without this prototyping and planning there wouldn't have been a kick starter campaign.

No its not an alpha, an alpha is already the core of the game with some features like SC in the current stage.

Yeah a prototype is for the testing of features or concepts or what ever with your game code and assets, because without game code and assets you cant test concepts/theories, right?

Prototypes do not have the core features of the game, its an idea put into technology in a usable state. Whether or not its used has nothing to do with final development. Whether it being prototyping a feature, something about learning and how to move forward with the technology, or just the bare minimum of the bases of the game...

Alphas have the core game mechanically working with features in rough shape or not started. Which is kind of where we are at with SC.

I know.., that means there is no difference between the development of project SC and Cyberpunk 2077, just a time frame of 3 month.

It means you don't know. They are working on two projects. What you said was flat out wrong about CDR only working on 1 project. They announced Cyberpunk and 2 years later released witcher 3. Turns out you can do this because witcher 3 is in post production, and cyberpunk is probably still in early prototyping/planning stages where you don't need a lot of people on the project.

Yes, but the most backers donated money for SC in the current planned scope, which costs a lot more dev time and it is bigger than Cyberpunk 2077.

Who says its new backers? The people throwing money at it aren't likely the ones complaining about it. The people who threw money at it and want their money back now seem to be the loudest people.

Not to mention with every ToS update they seem to be backing out of any refund service and also obligations to backer privileges. IE their open development shows some backer ships aren't even planned within the next couple of years, but prior to showing the schedule they changed the ToS so no refunds are eligible until they cease development (or likely it means run out of money for returns). If you backed this project you have the right to be upset.

And to be clear, I'm neither upset or complaining about the development. I'm only defending backers right to be upset for any one that has been invested in this game, pile of R&D tech demos have all we have seen. There isn't any real game shown yet, all the things they have shown are scripted events. They could be building out worlds/areas but gameplay mechanics to make any of that usable still seem to be missing from all of their demo's. IE they haven't really begun post production and populating the game for a release.

If we compare this game to other games with similar time lines, like wow. I'd bet that they had something of a working game with quests, leveling mechanics, and almost all of the core features fully fleshed out. They probably spent most of the development time and creating assets / building out quest lines, balancing and organizing skills.

Considering that what they have released in early-alpha stage already is better than most released AAA+ games out there I would say that not only they will deliver but they will be one of the pushing forces of the Gaming industry for years to come.

True but we cannot forget the disaster known as No Man's Sky.