The Star Citizen Thread V10

You just sounded like Crobber and his whales who haven't played many games then. There are plenty of game franchises out there with deep lore by now.
Touché :) . You do have a point though. FWIW, I don't think I am stuck in the past. I mostly play economic strategy games these days and in that area modern game devs have definitely gone far beyond the "classics." Games like Two Point Hospital, Planetbase, Transport Fever, Atomic Society and many more really push the boundaries for tycoon/builder types games. And what's more the flow of genuinely innovative releases just doesn't stop.

Maybe I am just nostalgic over the experience of playing Fallout 2 for the first time or getting immersed into the vampire LA world of VTMB. It's can be difficult to separate yourself from nostalgia (and I am not even that old; I am in my early 30s!).

I just wish there were more RPGs like original Fallouts where you can discover a whole new gameplay experience by selecting low INT scores.

As an avid Sci-Fi fan reading a LOT of books on this topic I m going to say that the lore, even tho maybe plentiful (I dont know...is it?) I am not impressed with SCs story, history or characters. The graphics help a lot to trigger your own fantasy but the world/game itself offers very little to support any big picture. When I take on a new book these days its almost always 2 things that hook me.

[snip]

Now the number of adults or "grown ups" is already pretty scarce on the internet but I feel that the SC community collected an unhealthy amount of qualities that are responsible for its perception of being "toxic".
SC has a ton of lore, but nothing to "actualize" the lore. Civilization in their universe was able to build a city-planet (ala Trantor/Coruscant) in multiple decades, yet they still have people mopping floors. In of itself, this doesn't have to be an issue. In many ways the Dune series or the Neuromancer universe also had many unrealistic components, but they had other things going for them. SC on the other hand feels like an a bunch of different concepts awkwardly glued together to maximize ship/JPEG sales.
 
Last edited:
The SQ42 stand-alone claim dodges all that though right? Because in part it's about unlicensed use of Cryengine code.
It doesnt, the copyright infringement claim was rejected IIRC. Now if they want to approach by the breach of contract side (by moving the goal posts to another part of the contract, by the way), and since the contract itself is unclear on that topic, they'll have to prove without doubt that CiG actions were damaging to them, and give actual numbers. That's why their new lawyer is trying to use the other claims now (like the code sharing on bugsmashers, etc.) to build up damaging charges, and again, even if the claims found valid they'll have to provide actual figures. That's where discovery comes in and that may or may not be their goal, here we enter speculation territory.
 
It doesnt, the copyright infringement claim was rejected IIRC. Now if they want to approach by the breach of contract side (by moving the goal posts to another part of the contract, by the way), and since the contract itself is unclear on that topic, they'll have to prove without doubt that CiG actions were damaging to them, and give actual numbers. That's why their new lawyer is trying to use the other claims now (like the code sharing on bugsmashers, etc.) to build up damaging charges, and again, even if the claims found valid they'll have to provide actual figures. That's where discovery comes in and that may or may not be their goal, here we enter speculation territory.
I pretty muich disregard explanations about the lawsuit and wait for a final verdict instead but if what you say is true I gotta correct my initial statement about turkish busniess men and accept that they are a revengeful lot :D
 

Goose4291

Banned
SC has a poopoo-ton of lore, but nothing to "actualize" the lore. Civilization in their universe was able to build a city-planet (ala Trantor/Coruscant) in multiple decades, yet they still have people mopping floors. In of itself, this doesn't have to be an issue. In many ways the Dune series or the Neuromancer universe also had many unrealistic components, but they had other things going for them. SC on the other hand feels like an a bunch of different concepts awkwardly glued together to maximize ship/JPEG sales.
Weirdly for me, that's the last thing I'd have issues with in terms of lore.

For as long as Humanity has a military, there will always be a need for a junior rating to push a mop around and take Henry for a walk down 3 Deck.

My favourite most believable moment in the re-imagined BSG was the closing shot of one episode had a deckhand pushing a brush around whistling the original TV series theme.

 
Civilization in their universe was able to build a city-planet (ala Trantor/Coruscant) in multiple decades
There are pleenty of backers having issues with a civilization creating an entire planet covered with a city within 30 years and hoping that those that write that lore will fix the dates.

  • System discovered at -50 years
  • Corporation begins terraform and cover planet with city -30 years
  • Current timeline 00 years
And the OTHER planet in that system has only ONE city and is littered with metal debris almost everywhere all over the planet.

Had they said 500 years since discovery and 300 years of polluting, building and exploiting then i could have bought the lore somewhat.
 
As an avid Sci-Fi fan reading a LOT of books on this topic I m going to say that the lore, even tho maybe plentiful (I dont know...is it?) I am not impressed with SCs story, history or characters. The graphics help a lot to trigger your own fantasy but the world/game itself offers very little to support any big picture. When I take on a new book these days its almost always 2 things that hook me.

  • plot/story
  • characters
And of course the best ones combine these 2 elements to create something special in my mind that I yearn for. I also demand a high level of technology, be it fictional or not...as long as it is detailed.
At my age I dont simply accept fairy tales anymore but demand a certain degree of realism. As I know a lot more about the topic since my 20s my expectations also grew. Today I m unable to enjoy most cincema movies due to their limits and focus (action, eye candy, 90-120 mins). Character conflict and development can be incredibly fascinating to me and this is an area only experienced and well.....good authors excell in. Earlier in my life I thought books were boring and of course my limited attention span didnt work. Today I value the level of tension, realism and story building that a book can provide which a movie simply cannot.

I prefer high-level sci-fi topics but I gotta say that there are books from the 50s which also hook me even tho their described technology is laughably primitive and simple compared to todays standards.

Star Citizen shows a remarkable lack of background story or realism to the uninvolved which I clearly am. I understand and accept todays games focus and limitations but if you advertise "fidelity" then you should at least attempt to provide some IMO. Maybe SQ42 will drive the character focus a bit more but I dont have any hopes after watching the extremely cheesy and simple dialogues so far. There is nothing complex or mysterious about Star Citizen to me. Nothing of the company complexities like in shadowrun or the level of technology that permeates into every humans life down to the lowest caste and changes humanity after it cracks FTL travel, artificial gravity or tolerance to the void. In this regard Cyberpunk has a high bar to crack for me. Graphics are just a secondary thing and nothing exceptional anymore today.

Star Citizen instead has only one strength....its visuals. And that strength already isnt anything special anymore. The characters are either forgettable or non-existing (because tech-demo). The tech demonstrated in the game is primitive or old-school and usually handwavium rather then believable mechanic. Some games try to go after the 80s flair specifically and intentionally while providing a high-tech environment but in SCs case I d dare to say the result is because of incompetence and lack of skill rather then intent.

Maybe Star Citizen will become more appealing once they start with NPC story-lines allowing players to experience a certain NPCs past and development due to your own performance but I really doubt that. By this I mean starting small and depending on your results in each mission giving observers the impression of how capabilities and options increase. Maybe even friendships which allow you to delve into a NPCs past and inner thoughts....creating an empathic link rather then a simple "hey I need money, better talk to Miles" train of thought.

SC missions I know of are extremely simple, shallow and have no impact on the world. This is something CIG needs to work on in order to reach a level of quality that matches todays games. The thing is that these things are hardly dependant on "blockers" except maybe if the "blocker" (how convinient that this vague term is simply accepted by the community and can mean anything) in question is the lack of skill or talent. But then SC never will become what I expect of it.

If we stay with the terms of "shallow" and "simple" pretty much every aspect of Star Citizen today matches these descriptions. The game world is simple, the planets...while looking good enough...have next to no content and are pretty shallow when it comes to diversity. Character development right now is simple...there is only one goal ingame....aquiring the next ship and more credits aka monetary increase of value (both of which can be paid for with RL money). If you deny this explanation then the only alternative is that Star Citizen is a sandbox with no goal. Some games provide this but at least they challenge the player with ingame mechanics and features. Star Citizens only challenge right now are its bugs which you fight and battle from the first minute. If you indeed dont encounter any the gameplay consists of bliss and pacification rather then engaging gamepplay. NPCs are simple and shallow. Companies providing all the ships are non-entities meaning you know of them because of the ship you fly or the armor/weapon you use but otherwise they have no impact on your playstyle or experience. The gameplay I m able to witness is bland, boring and not engaging at all tho I will admit that watching isnt the same as playing. There simply is no complexity that would entice me to try it out or play for myself tho that depends on an individuals preferences.

The flight model is unfinished, buggy, unrealistic and arcadey
The mining is simplistic and would drive me nuts due to its lack of complexity
The planets/moons are looking simple to me, due to the level or repetition in tiles and if people are praising the level of detail on the ground I can only say....its a barren landscape....how hard is it to look good?
Map navigation, ship travel, character movement, level of technology demonstrated on stations, atmosphere.....all these things are extremely simple or shallow in Star Citizen.


And people have the nerve to call ED "shallow"? I mean thats your right of course but its when these people praise SC for qualities that they deny ED that they instantly lose any credibility with me.

For example my wife also would consider ED shallow and boring. But she would at least stay consistent and simply disregard Star Citizen because its so much worse then ED is in these terms. And yet this is a behavior that you encounter often whenever you get into contact with the SC community. I asked myself about the reasons for this disparity in perception and because people in question usually are not forthcoming with info or truthful have to explain the reasons to myself instead.

You are a dreamer.
You put most of your focus on eye candy.
You are invested.
You have an ulterior motive
You are a troll

Now some of these points are not necessarily negative in nature. But they all usually are perceived as such. The term "newbie" is a descriptor that I used a lot in my past....often on myself. Today its a label of shame and ridicule. Pay to win also is a descriptor that isnt negative at first. Instead it gives you a hint of what to expect. But when it comes to fairness or equality (something that the west clearly values more then the east) these games usually fail. Being a dreamer today has the same taboo like "being a gamer" 30 years ago. Its an immediate title of shame and wastefulness. Dreaming is only "good" if you translate this quality into monetary success. Otherwise its a waste and something to be laughed about.

I have the luxury of time available today. And while only a few years ago I filled that void of activity with games I since have changed my perspective on life and how to use my time on this world. And whenever I have free time on my hands I dont switch to "braindead" mode or bombard myself with noise and eye explosions but rather "think" about things. You could say I dream just that today many of my "dreams" examine various lacks I observe in the world. A war, another humans situation, my own relationship etc etc. I dream up different states/conditions then think about how realistic they are, or how they came together and of course how I can influence them. Coming to conclusions or understanding isnt something that happens in a flash (mostly, for somesituations they do). You absolutely require time doing nothing but think in order to progress. You either do it consciously or subconsciously but its a requirement you cannot jump.

Star Citizen has very early lost my interest as a game and gained my fascination with the human psychy. Its because listening to SC fans describing the game as something its clearly not that peaks my interest as to why these people perceive SC so different to me or why they lie in the first place. Often enough its simply pushing back. You think you are under attack so you defend yourself. And because this is the Frontier forum most defend by lashing out against Elite Dangerous.

I was about to write a whole lot more but I think it would side-track even more then it already does and it would result in an absolute massive wall of text :)

We do have a wide range of SC fans in this thread (most people are skeptics by now, only a few keep an optimistic view) but the above is the reason why I value the insight of some and simply disregard others. I dont know any of these people and while some provide insight into their lifes its not necessary or a requirement (in addition its a description given by a stranger on the internet so.....). Just the quality of their posts is responsible for how I perceive these individuals.

Now the number of adults or "grown ups" is already pretty scarce on the internet but I feel that the SC community collected an unhealthy amount of qualities that are responsible for its perception of being "toxic".
Both Elite and Star Citizen have a long history of lore from which to mine. When both original games were release they were flying a little under the radar, and "borrowing" from movies and books wasn't seen as much of crime... well, not by those who didn't notice it happening, or were that bothered because the size of the game-playing audience at the time. Douglas Adams quite liked the homages paid to him by Elite.

Frontier Development do seem a little more concerned with maintaining a plausible back story. They gave away a novelette with their games and the Kickstarter for Elite: Dangerous included contracts for books. BTW, you say you're an avid SF reader. Have you read any of the Gollancz books? I've read and enjoyed all the Fantastic books, but not from the other publisher. Gavin Deas "Wanted" does look like a cracker of a read, but I've never gotten around to it yet. If you have read it, what's your opinion?

I'm not at all bothered by the... erm... eclectic nature of the Star Citizen universe. It is just a computer game, and the more experiences you can have as a player the better. I was a little more bothered watching that video Sovapid posted where it said they terraformed a gas giant <erk>. I'm all for poetic licence with the laws of physics where it makes gameplay more fun, but why didn't they just say they'd put a station into a close orbit around the planet, or they'd terraformed a moon? It seems like they're getting the science wrong just through lack of research.
 
There are pleenty of backers having issues with a civilization creating an entire planet covered with a city within 30 years and hoping that those that write that lore will fix the dates.

  • System discovered at -50 years
  • Corporation begins terraform and cover planet with city -30 years
  • Current timeline 00 years
And the OTHER planet in that system has only ONE city and is littered with metal debris almost everywhere all over the planet.

Had they said 500 years since discovery and 300 years of polluting, building and exploiting then i could have bought the lore somewhat.
As pocket sized, and unfidel as it is, the star system of Outer Wilds is richer and more coherent than SC's. Plus: it has a more interesting flight model, meaningful spacelegs and original story, lore and ways to convey them.

Outer Wilds reminds me a lot of Mercenary Damocles and Starglider 2. That you can make great things in tiny space, limited financial or technical means with good knowledge of limitations and clever ways to get around them.

Sorry for the OT.
 
I'm not at all bothered by the... erm... eclectic nature of the Star Citizen universe. It is just a computer game, and the more experiences you can have as a player the better.
I wouldn't too, if only they were not boasting themselves of fidelitized physicalities, physicalized fidelity, BDSSE, and such...
 
I was a little more bothered watching that video Sovapid posted where it said they terraformed a gas giant <erk>. I'm all for poetic licence with the laws of physics where it makes gameplay more fun, but why didn't they just say they'd put a station into a close orbit around the planet, or they'd terraformed a moon? It seems like they're getting the science wrong just through lack of research.
The lore writing is rather...irregular...we could say.

I mean, writing "Terraforming" instead of "built a floating city" on a gas giant is a rather humongous directional leap and the city covering of a planet in 30 years...

Sure, they might be extremely technologically advanced in 900 years but both technologically and the sheer logistics of it makes it completely implausible.
 
I started watching the video...

"In 2038 a man by the name of Chris Roberts founded a company called Roberts Space Industries..."

I stopped watching the video.
For the lulz, I went back to the video and continued. Here's the link with timestamp for those interested:
Source: https://youtu.be/36EV_p7AxJ4?t=108


So continuing...
"In 2038 a man by the name of Chris Roberts founded a company called Roberts Space Industries in the United States of America. Roberts' dream was to become like many of the other private space companies of the time, like Blue Origin and SpaceX."

Really? He has to use other real companies in his lore as well?? I gave the video a few more minutes then gave up again.

So ignoring the epic-level narcissism and megalomania (yeah yeah almost impossible, I know), since his lore is based on real companies, I wonder what will happen when the SC Development timeframe overlaps the SC Lore timeframe. Will he need to rewrite the Lore? I guess the simple answer is that it's a parallel but very divergent universe - ie. in SC, RSI actually does great things. Or another answer might be that whenever we look at SC development in our real world, it's like one of those bizzaro altered reality planes of existence where nothing quite makes sense. Much like this post... time for beer #3... :)
 
As pocket sized, and unfidel as it is, the star system of Outer Wilds is richer and more coherent than SC's. Plus: it has a more interesting flight model, meaningful spacelegs and original story, lore and ways to convey them.

Outer Wilds reminds me a lot of Mercenary Damocles and Starglider 2. That you can make great things in tiny space, limited financial or technical means with good knowledge of limitations and clever ways to get around them.

Sorry for the OT.
Why apologize? It's related to SC and a comparison to other works.

That said, have we SEEN actual gameplay and flight and how the world in Outer Wilds? I'm curious because the game looks nice.

Sure, it's the 10 minute snippet but it seems a bit little. It feels like a far smaller world and most likely not an MMO so they have limited scale on their side.

 
Which is the same can kicking as normal.

I'm tired of all this frankly. I want to play an updated Starlancer / WC. Is that too much to ask?
Nope, same here.

I think the issue, something that while it helps CIG in the long run is that both SQ42 and SC shares mechanics. If they had gone with more canned mechanics for SQ42 it should have been done sooner but since they all share the same things SQ42 will need the same stuff except the networking mechanics they have issues with.
 

Goose4291

Banned
Frontier Development do seem a little more concerned with maintaining a plausible back story. They gave away a novelette with their games and the Kickstarter for Elite: Dangerous included contracts for books. BTW, you say you're an avid SF reader. Have you read any of the Gollancz books? I've read and enjoyed all the Fantastic books, but not from the other publisher. Gavin Deas "Wanted" does look like a cracker of a read, but I've never gotten around to it yet. If you have read it, what's your opinion?
'Wanted' was just LA Takedown/Heat with spaceships. The other two Gollancz books weren't very good either tbh in my mind.
 
Both Elite and Star Citizen have a long history of lore from which to mine. When both original games were release they were flying a little under the radar, and "borrowing" from movies and books wasn't seen as much of crime... well, not by those who didn't notice it happening, or were that bothered because the size of the game-playing audience at the time. Douglas Adams quite liked the homages paid to him by Elite.

Frontier Development do seem a little more concerned with maintaining a plausible back story. They gave away a novelette with their games and the Kickstarter for Elite: Dangerous included contracts for books. BTW, you say you're an avid SF reader. Have you read any of the Gollancz books? I've read and enjoyed all the Fantastic books, but not from the other publisher. Gavin Deas "Wanted" does look like a cracker of a read, but I've never gotten around to it yet. If you have read it, what's your opinion?

I'm not at all bothered by the... erm... eclectic nature of the Star Citizen universe. It is just a computer game, and the more experiences you can have as a player the better. I was a little more bothered watching that video Sovapid posted where it said they terraformed a gas giant <erk>. I'm all for poetic licence with the laws of physics where it makes gameplay more fun, but why didn't they just say they'd put a station into a close orbit around the planet, or they'd terraformed a moon? It seems like they're getting the science wrong just through lack of research.
The backstory to ED has pretty much been thrown in the bin, whatever it was. Lore has been recut to a point where a lot of people simply don't care about it. We get 3 stories a week with massive gaps, no backstories on important corps or people.
 
Top Bottom