Intel NUC 13 Pro (Arena Canyon) review
Endorfy Arx 700 Air chassis review
Beelink SER5 Pro (Ryzen 7 5800H) mini PC review
Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD Review - 12GB/s
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti TUF Gaming review
MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X TRIO review
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB (FE) review
Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 Screenshots
Below the fold some screnshot from the upcoming 2.0 Alpha version of Star Citizen!
Admittedly, they do look good.
Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 - Star Map Video Preview - 10/12/2015 09:20 AM
Over at Citizencon the first Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 has been shown. Also announced was the fact that Hollywood stars will play part in the single player part, Squadron 42. Videos after the break....
Star Citizen Employees Speak Out on Project Woes - Crash and Burn ? - 10/02/2015 08:46 AM
The Escapist has posted an article with insider information from nine former employees of Star Citizen, alleging a hostile work environment and that the company has burned through $82 Million of the...
Star Citizen might require 100GB of storage capacity - 03/13/2015 08:26 AM
Okay, that's just getting out of hand bigtime. Star Citizen is looking to be a great title, a huge game .. but not just as a title, it will require a massive amount of storage space as well. Jeremy M...
Star Citizen To Support AMD's TressFX Tech - 10/13/2014 08:16 AM
AMD reconfirmed today that Star Citizen will support its TressFX tech. In addition, a new commercial video has been released that can be viewed below. And no I won't make any jokes about spaceships w...
Star Citizen's Latest Ship has 100,000 Polygons - 08/25/2014 08:57 AM
Cloud Imperium Games Technical Designer and resident CryEngine expert Dan Tracy explains the technology behind the stunning Origin M-50, which is the latest ship released for the game and an agile rac...
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 7432
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 7432
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5194309 Posted on: 11/23/2015 05:10 PM
I got this game when I bought my R9 290, but I still haven't played it yet, mainly because I've had enough other games to play in the meantime. I'm still waiting for the game to get more polished (particularly, beyond alpha stages) and by then I hope their Linux release will be ready. I know they're working on one but there doesn't appear to be any ETA.
I got this game when I bought my R9 290, but I still haven't played it yet, mainly because I've had enough other games to play in the meantime. I'm still waiting for the game to get more polished (particularly, beyond alpha stages) and by then I hope their Linux release will be ready. I know they're working on one but there doesn't appear to be any ETA.
harkinsteven
Senior Member
Posts: 2942
Joined: 2008-11-29
Senior Member
Posts: 2942
Joined: 2008-11-29
#5194310 Posted on: 11/23/2015 05:11 PM
Good grief...
I used an analogy because the toxicity of the thread I was involved with deemed it necessary at the time. I certainly was not lazy to write it, so reverse logic will not work on me, 'sir.
They didn't release the game with just the key element of the game (dog fighting) and then release the additional elements as either:
1) DLC
2) Free
3) Both of the above
IF (hypothetical) the key element of the game (dog fighting) was good enough to justify release (supervention), they would have released (conclusion).
Dropping an unfinished demo onto people who 'back' your game to pacify them is not releasing a fully completed game. If it was, there would be a review score 'final' judgement and it would be in sales charts and tracked accordingly. Having someone 'blog' about your demo, constitute a review it does not.
The validity of any compliant I have is that the banks said 'no' to funding. So did publishers. And yet, CR has mitigated risk by getting people to give him free money so he can build something which he and only he will control.
The day he runs out of money will be the day the game gets released for reals - until then, he is doing everything and anything to stop that day from coming.
If you believe otherwise, then I do care - not the other way around.
Fleecing the gaming community is ultimately what sickens me. Ubisoft and EA releasing the same game every 12 months is not a crime. This is the real crime.
I'm seriously laughing at all you idiots who think this game will not be released. Seriously LMAO.
To all non-idiots here's a recent gameplay vid from a couple of days ago from the 2.0 PTU.
j_qAtqm4XUI
Good grief...
I used an analogy because the toxicity of the thread I was involved with deemed it necessary at the time. I certainly was not lazy to write it, so reverse logic will not work on me, 'sir.
They didn't release the game with just the key element of the game (dog fighting) and then release the additional elements as either:
1) DLC
2) Free
3) Both of the above
IF (hypothetical) the key element of the game (dog fighting) was good enough to justify release (supervention), they would have released (conclusion).
Dropping an unfinished demo onto people who 'back' your game to pacify them is not releasing a fully completed game. If it was, there would be a review score 'final' judgement and it would be in sales charts and tracked accordingly. Having someone 'blog' about your demo, constitute a review it does not.
The validity of any compliant I have is that the banks said 'no' to funding. So did publishers. And yet, CR has mitigated risk by getting people to give him free money so he can build something which he and only he will control.
The day he runs out of money will be the day the game gets released for reals - until then, he is doing everything and anything to stop that day from coming.
If you believe otherwise, then I do care - not the other way around.
Fleecing the gaming community is ultimately what sickens me. Ubisoft and EA releasing the same game every 12 months is not a crime. This is the real crime.
I'm seriously laughing at all you idiots who think this game will not be released. Seriously LMAO.
To all non-idiots here's a recent gameplay vid from a couple of days ago from the 2.0 PTU.
j_qAtqm4XUI
holler
Senior Member
Posts: 222
Joined: 2003-07-07
Senior Member
Posts: 222
Joined: 2003-07-07
#5194355 Posted on: 11/23/2015 06:05 PM
Yep, pretty funny how people want to bag on this game. I have been playing Chris Roberts games since the early 90's and have never been disappointed. This is looking like his latest masterpiece, most likely his greatest.
I'm seriously laughing at all you idiots who think this game will not be released. Seriously LMAO.
To all non-idiots here's a recent gameplay vid from a couple of days ago from the 2.0 PTU.
j_qAtqm4XUI
Yep, pretty funny how people want to bag on this game. I have been playing Chris Roberts games since the early 90's and have never been disappointed. This is looking like his latest masterpiece, most likely his greatest.
I'm seriously laughing at all you idiots who think this game will not be released. Seriously LMAO.
To all non-idiots here's a recent gameplay vid from a couple of days ago from the 2.0 PTU.
j_qAtqm4XUI
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 14091
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 14091
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5194374 Posted on: 11/23/2015 06:28 PM
Good grief...
I used an analogy because the toxicity of the thread I was involved with deemed it necessary at the time. I certainly was not lazy to write it, so reverse logic will not work on me, 'sir.
They didn't release the game with just the key element of the game (dog fighting) and then release the additional elements as either:
1) DLC
2) Free
3) Both of the above
IF (hypothetical) the key element of the game (dog fighting) was good enough to justify release (supervention), they would have released (conclusion).
Dropping an unfinished demo onto people who 'back' your game to pacify them is not releasing a fully completed game. If it was, there would be a review score 'final' judgement and it would be in sales charts and tracked accordingly. Having someone 'blog' about your demo, constitute a review it does not.
The validity of any compliant I have is that the banks said 'no' to funding. So did publishers. And yet, CR has mitigated risk by getting people to give him free money so he can build something which he and only he will control.
The day he runs out of money will be the day the game gets released for reals - until then, he is doing everything and anything to stop that day from coming.
If you believe otherwise, then I do care - not the other way around.
Fleecing the gaming community is ultimately what sickens me. Ubisoft and EA releasing the same game every 12 months is not a crime. This is the real crime.
The game's scope has expanded beyond just dog fighting, and it made that expansion years ago. None of the people that are giving him money just want a dog fighting sim. They want racing, they want FPS, they want dog fighting, they want exploration, they want a single player campaign. And they want it wrapped into a nice package. Instead of just going into hiding and making all that behind the scenes, he opened the development for the entire community of people who donated/pledged to watch. He released modules as they were completed and allowed backers to not only play them but influence the future of them.
I don't see how that's a crime. And honestly, for the most part, the backers of the game are pleased with how he's handling it. The only people that seem to cry about it are people that have no financial stake in the game. Every time Star Citizen gets brought up on Guru3D there are always random people, who clearly didn't pledge at any point, that come in and just spew streams of garbage all over the thread. On the flipside you have people that have donated/subscribed/pledged who are clearly happy with the game, even in it's current state -- as evident from quite a few of them in this thread. They are adults and they are capable of making intelligent/responsible decisions with their money.
Like I said, I don't know if the game will ever be completed or be a financial success or ever accomplish what it set out to do. But it's pretty clear that Chris Roberts is working on it. The money didn't go to waste, it didn't just close up and the entire project get scraped. It's clearly being developed, they are clearly hiring top talent (like Gary Oldman and Mark Hamill) and they are clearly developing and releasing modules.
Good grief...
I used an analogy because the toxicity of the thread I was involved with deemed it necessary at the time. I certainly was not lazy to write it, so reverse logic will not work on me, 'sir.
They didn't release the game with just the key element of the game (dog fighting) and then release the additional elements as either:
1) DLC
2) Free
3) Both of the above
IF (hypothetical) the key element of the game (dog fighting) was good enough to justify release (supervention), they would have released (conclusion).
Dropping an unfinished demo onto people who 'back' your game to pacify them is not releasing a fully completed game. If it was, there would be a review score 'final' judgement and it would be in sales charts and tracked accordingly. Having someone 'blog' about your demo, constitute a review it does not.
The validity of any compliant I have is that the banks said 'no' to funding. So did publishers. And yet, CR has mitigated risk by getting people to give him free money so he can build something which he and only he will control.
The day he runs out of money will be the day the game gets released for reals - until then, he is doing everything and anything to stop that day from coming.
If you believe otherwise, then I do care - not the other way around.
Fleecing the gaming community is ultimately what sickens me. Ubisoft and EA releasing the same game every 12 months is not a crime. This is the real crime.
The game's scope has expanded beyond just dog fighting, and it made that expansion years ago. None of the people that are giving him money just want a dog fighting sim. They want racing, they want FPS, they want dog fighting, they want exploration, they want a single player campaign. And they want it wrapped into a nice package. Instead of just going into hiding and making all that behind the scenes, he opened the development for the entire community of people who donated/pledged to watch. He released modules as they were completed and allowed backers to not only play them but influence the future of them.
I don't see how that's a crime. And honestly, for the most part, the backers of the game are pleased with how he's handling it. The only people that seem to cry about it are people that have no financial stake in the game. Every time Star Citizen gets brought up on Guru3D there are always random people, who clearly didn't pledge at any point, that come in and just spew streams of garbage all over the thread. On the flipside you have people that have donated/subscribed/pledged who are clearly happy with the game, even in it's current state -- as evident from quite a few of them in this thread. They are adults and they are capable of making intelligent/responsible decisions with their money.
Like I said, I don't know if the game will ever be completed or be a financial success or ever accomplish what it set out to do. But it's pretty clear that Chris Roberts is working on it. The money didn't go to waste, it didn't just close up and the entire project get scraped. It's clearly being developed, they are clearly hiring top talent (like Gary Oldman and Mark Hamill) and they are clearly developing and releasing modules.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 5029
Joined: 2008-09-07
Yeah I really don't care about your analogy. If you're too lazy to find it yourself and post it then it's probably not relevant.
You said specifically in this thread that they wouldn't release the dog fighting element of the game because it would effect their funding. But they already have released the dog fighting element of the game a year ago and have updated it several times. It hasn't seem to effected their funding at all.
That link is most definitely a review of the dog fighting element. There are tons more if you simply google "review arena commander star citizen", some offer more details than others. I personally don't care to read them because I have zero interest in the game.
If you have a valid complaint about the game's development I'd love to hear it. But so far in this thread AMDJoe is the only one who brought any reasonable issue up. I do think the vast majority of people will be tired of the game before it's fully finished. It happens all the time with games that get modular releases. And it's hard to build hype when most of it is playable now.
Good grief...
I used an analogy because the toxicity of the thread I was involved with deemed it necessary at the time. I certainly was not lazy to write it, so reverse logic will not work on me, 'sir.
They didn't release the game with just the key element of the game (dog fighting) and then release the additional elements as either:
1) DLC
2) Free
3) Both of the above
IF (hypothetical) the key element of the game (dog fighting) was good enough to justify release (supervention), they would have released (conclusion).
Dropping an unfinished demo onto people who 'back' your game to pacify them is not releasing a fully completed game. If it was, there would be a review score 'final' judgement and it would be in sales charts and tracked accordingly. Having someone 'blog' about your demo, constitute a review it does not.
The validity of any compliant I have is that the banks said 'no' to funding. So did publishers. And yet, CR has mitigated risk by getting people to give him free money so he can build something which he and only he will control.
The day he runs out of money will be the day the game gets released for reals - until then, he is doing everything and anything to stop that day from coming.
If you believe otherwise, then I do care - not the other way around.
Fleecing the gaming community is ultimately what sickens me. Ubisoft and EA releasing the same game every 12 months is not a crime. This is the real crime.