Scythe Mugen 5 Rev.C CPU Cooler review
be quiet Pure Loop 2 FX 280mm LCS review
HP FX900 1 TB NVMe Review
Scythe FUMA2 Rev.B CPU Cooler review
SK Hynix Platinum P41 2TB M.2 NVMe SSD Review
Corsair K70 RGB PRO Mini Wireless review
MSI MPG A1000G - 1000W PSU Review
Goodram IRDM PRO M.2 SSD 2 TB NVMe SSD Review
Samsung T7 Shield Portable 1TB USB SSD review
DeepCool LS720 (LCS) review
Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 is available
Some news for Star Citizen backers as Alpha 3.0 is currently available on the Public Test Server to everyone. This basically means that everyone who has backed up this project will be able to test the alpha 3.0 version of the game.
Cloud Imperium initially released Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 to all Evocati Test Flight volunteer members back in October. And after two and a half months, the team decided to open its gates to all backers. Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 features planetary landings, persistent universe content, a new back-end item system, implementation of commodities, trading, automated cargo buy/sell kiosks, and, indirectly, piracy, as well as network improvements and user interface enhancements. You can download the latest Star Citizen launcher from here. PC gamers will also have to copy their account to PTU (https://robertsspaceindustries.com/account/copy/ptu). After doing that, backers will get their temporary PTU password delivered in email.
Crytek sues Star Citizen studios CryEngine - 12/14/2017 12:04 PM
CryEngine makes Crytek is suing the team behind Star Citizen for breach of contract. This lawsuit, filed in U.S. district court in California, has the potential to disrupt development of a game that i...
New Star Citizen Video Shows Very nice Graphics - 05/15/2017 08:00 AM
Chris Roberts’ Cloud Imperium Games released a brand new video of Star Citizen. The video showcases several improvements that the development teams have been implementing in the game, includ...
Star Citizen Reaches A Staggering $148 Million in Crowdfunding - 04/29/2017 12:31 PM
There's no stopping the Star Citizen hype-train. The title now has passed $148,000,000 in crowd funding. Director Chris Roberts explained the philosophy behind the game’s continued crowd-f...
Star Citizen to go Vulkan exclusively - 03/20/2017 09:38 AM
The Star Citizen developer has confirmed that the game will be ditching support for DirectX entirely going forward in favour of the Vulkan graphics renderer API....
Star Citizen Trailer Shows the MISC Prospector - 02/20/2017 06:36 AM
Cloud Imperium Games released a new trailer of its upcoming space simulator Star Citizen. The trailer features the MISC Prospector, which is a popular mining craft within the universe of the game. Eve...
gx-x
Senior Member
Posts: 1519
Joined: 2007-03-18
Senior Member
Posts: 1519
Joined: 2007-03-18
#5504356 Posted on: 12/25/2017 02:54 PM
Something that should be tested and ran internally in the company and not sold? If you need more people to test it, you pay people to do it? For decades, that's what alpha was.
Do you know what alpha is?
Do you even know what an alpha version is?
Something that should be tested and ran internally in the company and not sold? If you need more people to test it, you pay people to do it? For decades, that's what alpha was.
Do you know what alpha is?
Cave Waverider
Senior Member
Posts: 1374
Joined: 2010-07-25
Senior Member
Posts: 1374
Joined: 2010-07-25
#5504369 Posted on: 12/25/2017 04:22 PM
Something that should be tested and ran internally in the company and not sold? If you need more people to test it, you pay people to do it? For decades, that's what alpha was.
Do you know what alpha is?I do. An alpha version doesn't mean it's internal. In fact, alpha versions are usually the first ones tested by people outside the development team. Now that could be people inside the company or outsiders. Alpha versions are usually very early test versions that aren't feature complete and are often riddled by bugs.
Of course, the traditional way to handle this is to invite experienced/qualified testers to a closed alpha test. However, it didn't always mean they'd be paid.
That said, I don't like these modern practices of "pay to test" at all, it's a practice I do not like. Having unqualified people test software, especially in early stages may do more harm than good. It's an ethical dilemma, however, and has nothing to do with the state of an alpha version and people miraculously expecting it to be feature complete and/or bug free in an alpha state, which is why I asked the poster that repeatedly complained about bugs if he understood what an alpha version is.
Something that should be tested and ran internally in the company and not sold? If you need more people to test it, you pay people to do it? For decades, that's what alpha was.
Do you know what alpha is?I do. An alpha version doesn't mean it's internal. In fact, alpha versions are usually the first ones tested by people outside the development team. Now that could be people inside the company or outsiders. Alpha versions are usually very early test versions that aren't feature complete and are often riddled by bugs.
Of course, the traditional way to handle this is to invite experienced/qualified testers to a closed alpha test. However, it didn't always mean they'd be paid.
That said, I don't like these modern practices of "pay to test" at all, it's a practice I do not like. Having unqualified people test software, especially in early stages may do more harm than good. It's an ethical dilemma, however, and has nothing to do with the state of an alpha version and people miraculously expecting it to be feature complete and/or bug free in an alpha state, which is why I asked the poster that repeatedly complained about bugs if he understood what an alpha version is.
gx-x
Senior Member
Posts: 1519
Joined: 2007-03-18
Senior Member
Posts: 1519
Joined: 2007-03-18
#5504372 Posted on: 12/25/2017 04:50 PM
We do agree to a point. I will however have to insist that SELLING an alpha version should be out of the question.
With that said, it's a different matter when people are like "take my money!!!!". Doesn't make it right, but it does make it somewhat justifiable from the company standpoint. But when the company thinks that they can just continue to milk these gullible people because if they release the game the funding is over, then it begs the question: how much is too much and when does it become illegal?
Why would they ever release the game (that would mean no more hiding behind the "alpha" ) if they can keep the netcode as it is (barley working), engine as it is, and really just delay all the hard work on engine indefinitely (while still charging people for new "modules")???
sometime just having a certain combination of hardware is qualification enough. No one can expect a company to have 1000000 hardware combinations to test on...
PS. People complain about bugs that have been in game for 3 years...Is it really unreasonable to complain about them while watching modules added, plans changed etc? Or, let's put it the other way around - is it reasonable for a company to not fix some of the earliest bugs (~3 years old) but put out 4 new modules (claiming it took xyz thousands of hours and whole NASA to make) and take money for those?
But like I said (and so did you) - it's Alpha, so...company doesn't really have to fix that NOW, as long as the money is coming in - its all fine
(yea, I am one of those that leans toward the "it's never going to be released" side)
We do agree to a point. I will however have to insist that SELLING an alpha version should be out of the question.
With that said, it's a different matter when people are like "take my money!!!!". Doesn't make it right, but it does make it somewhat justifiable from the company standpoint. But when the company thinks that they can just continue to milk these gullible people because if they release the game the funding is over, then it begs the question: how much is too much and when does it become illegal?
Why would they ever release the game (that would mean no more hiding behind the "alpha" ) if they can keep the netcode as it is (barley working), engine as it is, and really just delay all the hard work on engine indefinitely (while still charging people for new "modules")???
Having unqualified people test software, especially in early stages
sometime just having a certain combination of hardware is qualification enough. No one can expect a company to have 1000000 hardware combinations to test on...
PS. People complain about bugs that have been in game for 3 years...Is it really unreasonable to complain about them while watching modules added, plans changed etc? Or, let's put it the other way around - is it reasonable for a company to not fix some of the earliest bugs (~3 years old) but put out 4 new modules (claiming it took xyz thousands of hours and whole NASA to make) and take money for those?
But like I said (and so did you) - it's Alpha, so...company doesn't really have to fix that NOW, as long as the money is coming in - its all fine
(yea, I am one of those that leans toward the "it's never going to be released" side)
NewTRUMP Order
Senior Member
Posts: 598
Joined: 2017-02-04
Senior Member
Posts: 598
Joined: 2017-02-04
#5504549 Posted on: 12/26/2017 03:11 PM
Do you even know what sarcasm is Chris?
Do you even know what an alpha version is?
Do you even know what sarcasm is Chris?
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1374
Joined: 2010-07-25