Denial:

You've always needed to pay? Lol They are bringing the Gen12 renderer up before they move to Vulkan. Some elements of Gen12 are online now - ray marching to do clouds for example.. which actually came out really good: [youtube=W1XurjeUG3Q] Still has some artificating but they are working on reducing it. Couple other things use Gen12 but basically next several patches will be moving all the rendering to Gen12. Their reasoning was basically that they could work on moving the Crytech renderer to Vulkan but most of the individual elements aren't setup to use take advantages of modern graphics APIs - so you wouldn't see any benefit. So instead they are rebuilding the elements of the renderer that can take advantage using newer techniques and making sure they don't break stuff in the process. Then after those are done, Vulkan.

It bothers me that there is no endgame in site for completion, I refuse to buy to any more early access stuff, but I have to admit the scope and design of this game is looking awesome. I really hope it hits v1.0 at some point in the future.

Denial:

You've always needed to pay? Lol They are bringing the Gen12 renderer up before they move to Vulkan. Some elements of Gen12 are online now - ray marching to do clouds for example.. which actually came out really good: [youtube=W1XurjeUG3Q] Still has some artificating but they are working on reducing it. Couple other things use Gen12 but basically next several patches will be moving all the rendering to Gen12. Their reasoning was basically that they could work on moving the Crytech renderer to Vulkan but most of the individual elements aren't setup to use take advantages of modern graphics APIs - so you wouldn't see any benefit. So instead they are rebuilding the elements of the renderer that can take advantage using newer techniques and making sure they don't break stuff in the process. Then after those are done, Vulkan.

Have they added the network code to the game yet so you can PVP with other players or interact with them?

I remember when they were saying a GTX 780 will run this maxed out. That's how long it's been in development hell. The game will never live up to it's promise. Zero chance of that happening.

metagamer:

I remember when they were saying a GTX 780 will run this maxed out. That's how long it's been in development hell. The game will never live up to it's promise. Zero chance of that happening.

I suppose it depends. There is only so much you can add texture wise. DirectX 12 for example. Vulcan I don't know much about other that it's open source.

Now that I think of it, I actually do have a finished Star Citizen product! A polo shirt, that is. A few years ago I went out to eat with a bunch of friends, wearing that shirt. They started laughing the moment they saw it. That wasn't a waste of money, though. It's quite a good looking shirt of decent quality, and it was heavily discounted at the fan store, so it was a pretty good purchase back then.

Denial:

Dunno, every patch I log 2-3 dozen hours and enjoy the frack out of it. Get more fun out of this alpha bugfest then shitty battlefield trash that costs twice as much to buy into.

Over 3,000 hours of gaming time in two games that cost less than the ENTRY level point to SC. Both games I bought in to as Early Access and both games got finished. Doesn't matter how good SC is it will never keep me as engaged as these two games have The long story short is we find our enjoyment where we find it. For some it's the low cost 1 man team developing a game with a structured release schedule and a viable reachable goal for others it's the multi million cash grab that promises the Earth and so far has delivered dirt and appears to be managed by a bunch of semi-qualified chimps with no actual end game in site, but that sums up most of the Battlefields of the last few years (shame on you if you thought I was referencing SC!) As for SC, yeah it will never give me over 2,000hours of gaming fun. The ironic thing about games that offer you the ability to do everything and anything is that most players will end up focusing on a single factor, making as much of whatever drives the in game economy as possible, usually at the expense of all fun. Rimworld and Factorio keep me engaged because the core gameplay loops and final objectives are stupidly simple and none of them are based on the acquisition of a specific in game currency, they then allow you to go about reaching the endgame objectives however you feel.

Kaarme:

Now that I think of it, I actually do have a finished Star Citizen product! A polo shirt, that is. A few years ago I went out to eat with a bunch of friends, wearing that shirt. They started laughing the moment they saw it. That wasn't a waste of money, though. It's quite a good looking shirt of decent quality, and it was heavily discounted at the fan store, so it was a pretty good purchase back then.

Do you still wear it/have it?

Ghosty:

Have they added the network code to the game yet so you can PVP with other players or interact with them?

Yeah, you've been able to do that for years now - like 5-6 years since Alpha 2.0. You can do missions together (there's several mission types), multicrew ships (although the multicrew functionality is lacking - mostly just turret shooting or managing various power systems/shields/multicrew mining in specific ships), PvP together (50 people on a server), etc. The most fun experiences I had in the game were with friends, typically doing a mission then engaging in PvP when someone turns up.

The Laughing Ma:

Over 3,000 hours of gaming time in two games that cost less than the ENTRY level point to SC. Both games I bought in to as Early Access and both games got finished. Doesn't matter how good SC is it will never keep me as engaged as these two games have The long story short is we find our enjoyment where we find it. For some it's the low cost 1 man team developing a game with a structured release schedule and a viable reachable goal for others it's the multi million cash grab that promises the Earth and so far has delivered dirt and appears to be managed by a bunch of semi-qualified chimps with no actual end game in site, but that sums up most of the Battlefields of the last few years (shame on you if you thought I was referencing SC!) As for SC, yeah it will never give me over 2,000hours of gaming fun. The ironic thing about games that offer you the ability to do everything and anything is that most players will end up focusing on a single factor, making as much of whatever drives the in game economy as possible, usually at the expense of all fun. Rimworld and Factorio keep me engaged because the core gameplay loops and final objectives are stupidly simple and none of them are based on the acquisition of a specific in game currency, they then allow you to go about reaching the endgame objectives however you feel.

I hear you. I'm sure there's people that enjoy BF - my point was like it's always weird to come into these threads and see people talk about the game as if there's nothing there, its just vapor -- but then log into the game and see people with literally thousands of hours playing it, talking about how much they love it - talking about the future of it, what's in the next patches, what the latest ISC is saying, etc. The community itself is awesome and does lots of cool things - there's large scale organized races that groups put together, basically they race across a planet, with checkpoints where they'll switch vehicles - they "hire" people to run security for it, etc. There are large scale PvP events that people put together - essentially just get 30-40 people and act out a fire fight on a planet or base. There's improvised raids and scenarios they setup. There's tons of community emergent gameplay that's super fun. Then there's obviously the game's curated content via missions, quests, global events, etc. I play with several friends - we usually get tired of the more annoying bugs, but each patch we tend to log like 50-60 hours into it.. do the new stuff, maybe hit up one of the events, then get out. I spent a little more money because I wanted a Cutlass Black, but they only spent $40 and they play similar amount of time. All together, over the last 3-4 years we've been playing.. probably thousand hours or so of gameplay for a hundred bucks. In comparison I bought BF5 for $70 and played 7 hours. BF1 I think I got to like 30-40 hours for same price or whatever.

Denial:

Yeah, you've been able to do that for years now - like 5-6 years since Alpha 2.0. You can do missions together (there's several mission types), multicrew ships (although the multicrew functionality is lacking - mostly just turret shooting or managing various power systems/shields/multicrew mining in specific ships), PvP together (50 people on a server), etc. The most fun experiences I had in the game were with friends, typically doing a mission then engaging in PvP when someone turns up.

50 on a server is well thought out. Any more and it's going to be a nightmare with all the particle effects and stuff. Eve Online is one example I can think of where in principle it's awesome, but in reality the lag on the servers is too much with over 100 players.

Any doubt now this is a scam ? After so many millions of dollars ( 404+ and counting ) and 10 years not a finish game ... 😱 alpha state forever and ever !

Ghosty:

Do you still wear it/have it?

Indeed I do. I only wear it a few times a summer, so it's in perfect condition.

Star Citizen's budget is so big it's out of this galaxy Star Citizen is officially one of the most expensive video games of all time, commands budget that's 4x of today's biggest games. Star Citizen is one of the most expensive video games of all time and has an astronomically high budget. According to a new financing update, Roberts Space Industries has raised an mind-boggling $400 million to fund Star Citizen's development. The infamous space sim has been in development for nearly 10 years and first entered Kickstarter in 2012; nearly a decade later and a budget that's roughly 4x today's biggest heavy-hitting franchises, Star Citizen still isn't finished or officially released. Complete front page news and source: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/82902/star-citizens-budget-is-so-big-its-out-of-this-galaxy/index.html

chispy:

Star Citizen's budget is so big it's out of this galaxy Star Citizen is officially one of the most expensive video games of all time, commands budget that's 4x of today's biggest games. Star Citizen is one of the most expensive video games of all time and has an astronomically high budget. According to a new financing update, Roberts Space Industries has raised an mind-boggling $400 million to fund Star Citizen's development. The infamous space sim has been in development for nearly 10 years and first entered Kickstarter in 2012; nearly a decade later and a budget that's roughly 4x today's biggest heavy-hitting franchises, Star Citizen still isn't finished or officially released. Complete front page news and source: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/82902/star-citizens-budget-is-so-big-its-out-of-this-galaxy/index.html

They kind of answered their own question with the quote at the bottom of the page. "The best answer for your question is Squadron 42 will be done when it is done, and will not be released just to make a date but instead once all the tech and content is finished, polished and it plays great".

Ghosty:

I suppose it depends. There is only so much you can add texture wise. DirectX 12 for example. Vulcan I don't know much about other that it's open source.

For sure, it was more of a jibe at how long the game has been in development hell.

metagamer:

For sure, it was more of a jibe at how long the game has been in development hell.

Even I poke fun at that. There must have been some major, major problems or hurdles to face for the game to not have released after all this time.

Maybe this is a new concept where a game gets slowly updated but will never reach an actual form. Instead it will change a bit from here and there over the course, on top of getting new content. Good for those who love updates and changes. You don't have to decide what your game is like, it can change and form forever, only steady flow of money is needed from customers. Even the price is not set in stone, you can pay as much as you want. Any sensible fellow by now knows not to give them more money. The game is either bust or they will return again some day to ask more money. Hard to believe it's ever going to be finished, only way would be the IP to change hands.

GamerNerves:

Maybe this is a new concept where a game gets slowly updated but will never reach an actual form. Instead it will change a bit from here and there over the course, on top of getting new content. Good for those who love updates and changes. You don't have to decide what your game is like, it can change and form forever, only steady flow of money is needed from customers. Even the price is not set in stone, you can pay as much as you want. Any sensible fellow by now knows to not give them more money. The game is either bust or they will return some day to ask more money. Hard to believe it's ever going to be finished, only way would be the IP to change hands.

The only way for the IP to change hands is for another publisher to stump up the cash that has already been spent. So in excess of 400 million to buy the Star Citizen.

What a terrible take. Star Citizen is available, costs $45, and has more content than any game I've ever touched. Stop being so asinine that your "StAr CitIzEn iS A ScAm" take was completely wrong.

Ghosty:

Even I poke fun at that. There must have been some major, major problems or hurdles to face for the game to not have released after all this time.

Part of it is mismanagement but I also think comparing it to other games development cycles is pretty foolish. Typically when a company greenlights a new project, let's say something like GTA5 - they greenlight it in pre-production with a budget, rough scope of what the project is going to be and most importantly a plan on how they're going to build develop it. Rockstar has existing studios, they staff hundreds of people, they don't need to buy computers, tables, desks, chairs, buildings, software etc. All that cost is included and paid for over the last 5 games they developed or whatever. They don't need to build internal office documentation procedures or hire administrative staff. They don't need hire network engineers or IT staff (to support the development, not to actually develop the game) or janitors or producers. All the internal tools on GTA5 are mostly reworked from GTA4. The engine is slightly reworked. The code for driving is basically the same, maybe slightly tweaked, but mostly reused. The code/tools for animations, for asset management, physics systems, etc - it's all been built out over two decades of development of GTA games. Rockstar sunk at least half a billion dollars into GTA5 but those costs and the time are just hidden in previous games. A game like GTA, or Battlefield or whatever starts off with a bunch of things already done. Then they immediately hire 300-400 developers in the first couple weeks - or already have them then go to work for 3-4 years and boom out comes a finished product. People see it and say "Hey look GTA5 was $250M (or whatever) budget and took 4 years why can't Starcitizen have anything?" But in reality GTA5 started off half done and paid for. Starcitizen is literally the opposite. They start with nothing - was like 5 people. The first year they made $10M. They probably scoped out a game for $10M and started.. but then by the second year they had $30M more - $40M total. So now what do you do? Do you change scope? Do hire more staff? Do you lease a building for said staff? Idk. Let's keep making the $10M game maybe and see - maybe we won't get more. Another year goes by and suddenly, bam $35M more. You're now up to $75M but you're building a $10M game. Are people going to be disappointed? Probably. (There's probably some alternative universe where they stuck to the $10M game but collected $100M more, released the $10M game and a Guru3D is talking about how shit of a game Starcitizen is for $100M.) They're going to ask wtf did you build for $75M? So you start hiring. But that takes time. SC didn't get 300 developers on it until 4 years after the project started - most AAA games have that day one. The money keeps coming, the scope keeps getting bigger, you keep hiring, etc. They currently have 600+ developers and are developing what amounts to two games. SQ42 should be a neatly wrapped package when it comes out. Starcitizen is going to be in development forever and that's basically the intention with it. It's a constantly evolving game and as long as people who enjoy playing what they've released so far keeps giving them money, they'll keep developing it. The thing people here don't realize, is that the gamers that play the game.. they want that. They want to fund it. They love what they are playing and they want to see it be built out, even if it takes decades. So idk, it's like - once in a life time opportunity to build a game with no constraints. Could be a colossal failure but so far, having actually played it for hundreds of hours, there is a game taking shape and it's pretty fun - vastly more fun than all these other $100m to $200m games and it's not even close to being done. So I sit here and just kind of laugh when people compare it.. because I'd rather play a $400M, $100 buy in Starcitizen bugfest alpha than "finished" "released" Cyberpunk 2077 or Battlefield 5 literally any day of the week.

Denial:

Part of it is mismanagement but I also think comparing it to other games development cycles is pretty foolish. Typically when a company greenlights a new project, let's say something like GTA5 - they greenlight it in pre-production with a budget, rough scope of what the project is going to be and most importantly a plan on how they're going to build develop it. Rockstar has existing studios, they staff hundreds of people, they don't need to buy computers, tables, desks, chairs, buildings, etc - they don't need to build internal office documentation procedures or hire administrative staff. They don't need hire network engineers or IT staff (to support the development, not to actually develop the game) or janitors or producers. All the internal tools on GTA5 are mostly reworked from GTA4. The engine is slightly reworked. The code for driving is basically the same, maybe slightly tweaked, but mostly reused. The code/tools for animations, for asset management, physics systems, etc - it's all been built out over two decades of development of GTA games. A game like GTA, or Battlefield starts off with a bunch of things already done for it. Then they immediately hire 300-400 developers in the first couple weeks - or already have them then go to work for 3-4 years and boom out comes a finished product. Starcitizen is literally the opposite. They start with nothing - was like 5 people. The first year they made $10M. They probably scoped out a game for $10M and started.. but then by the second year they had $30M more - $40 total. So now what do you do? Do you change scope? Do hire more staff? Do you lease a building? Let's keep making the $10M game maybe and see - maybe we won't get more. Another year goes by and suddenly, bam $35M more. You're now up to $75M but you're building a $10M game. Are people going to be disappointed? Probably. They're going to ask wtf did you build for $75M? So you start hiring. But that takes time. SC didn't get 300 developers on it until 4 years after the project started - most AAA games have that day one. The money keeps coming, the scope keeps getting bigger, you keep hiring, etc. They currently have 600+ developers and are developing what amounts to two games. SQ42 should be a neatly wrapped package when it comes out. Starcitizen is going to be in development forever and that's basically the intention with it. It's a constantly evolving game and as long as people who enjoy playing what they've released so far keeps giving them money, they'll keep developing it. The thing people here don't realize, is that the gamers that play the game.. they want that. They want to fund it. They love what they are playing and they want to see it be built out, even if it takes decades. So idk, it's like - once in a life time opportunity to build a game with no constraints. Could be a colossal failure but so far, having actually played it for hundreds of hours, there is a game taking shape and it's pretty fun - vastly more fun than all these other $100m to $200m games and it's not even close to being done. So I sit here and just kind of laugh when people compare it.. because I'd rather play a $400M, $100 buy in Starcitizen bugfest alpha than Cyberpunk 2077 literally any day of the week.

There is a flaw in your argument. Now that they have 600+ developers working on the game, how is it not even close to being finished? How can there not be some kind of end point to when the game will be finished, as almost all games have something that's close to the final product. You start off with a blueprint, have meetings to discuss how the game will be shaped. Yes I know that's hard to do with a space sim with infinite space to consider, but still. It makes you wonder.