Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Dec 4, 2015.
Oh, hows it perform on your 570, nwc?
What does "nwc" stand for,.. 'African American' With Charisma?
So my statement about the intial goals plus the added stretch goals being financially met was in fact correct! :3eyes:
A whole other debate, I don't care what they are doing with the money, though I know a lot of folk would be rather interested to find out but you know what this is :bang: 'debating' anything with the diehard defend SC no matter what folk is a waste of time. I think the limited number selling of a product that by definition has no physical (and it would appear in the case of SC no financial) limitation is a crappy policy, you think it is some how a great saving for people I am done 'debating' this tedious subject.
The outcome doesn't doesn't change the fact that the game, every example of any gameplay from it, just looked boring and crap, nice graphics mind.
You must have literally zero idea about what it takes to run a game like this huh?
Otherwise I don't see how you make this comment. What, you think that you make money from the kickstarter and then spend it all on developing the game that "oh, alright here is our game.. its ready to release!.. oh wait, we've burned through 90% of the money we've earned making the game.. that's okay! the game is done! Woo hoo!".
Their goal is for this game to stand as the go to sci-fi space simulator / fps / exploration / trading / faction game for the next many years.. you think you keep a game like this running on smiles and french fries? Dude. get a clue.
I gues that's why its so great that its still in Alpha and not close to being finished yet, right?
As far as everything else, you're looking at it from a negetive perspecting because that's what you wanna do.
The fact of the matter is that anyone can go right now, drop $45 bucks, get the full single player campaign and access to the MMO Universe once it releases. If you wanna spend more, there are options available to do just that. Everything however will be attainable in game.
As far as releasing things in limited quantities, you're free to consider it a "shady business practise" but you thinking that it is does not make it so..
I fail to see what the problem is, and that's largely because people who don't understand vast details of this game and its intentions are making up their own problems out of ignorance. Also seems to me that some people are so protectionist over their own money, they feel its in their right to call out others for backing this or any other project when people have money to spend and can choose to use it as they wish.
Right so 90% of this is incorrect on your part.
Your first point you're misinterpreting.
NPCs will make up the VAST majority of all players in the persistent universe.
If you think a clan with a lot of ships will be able to sit in a particular area of space, they may be able to for a while, but all it would take is a couple other clans to team up or even a larger NPC hoard to come in a demolish their camping. They would suffer such huge losses to their fleets that it wouldn't be worth it to do this.
Also, why would you do this with an Aurora? what a stupid comment.. the Aurora is meant to be a starter ship which you use to get to your next ship, which you in turn use to work your way up to the next one.
All that buying ships now allows you to not have to spend the time to get them in game, but doesn't mean you suddenly WIN.. there is no suddenly WIN in this game.. why can't people understand this?
The only point that holds any weight is your last one.. sure, someone who's purchased the 15K pack definitely has perks from doing so.. wouldn't you expect this for 15k? That spend saves that user tons of time growing and earning ships in the universe.. however, they alone can't fly all those ships at once, and certainly can't fly 95% of them alone. they will need to spend in game currency to either pay NPCs to fly them, or work with others and pay them just the same.. they still need to EARN the credits to do this IN GAME.
Also, why do people act like there are thousands of people who have purchased this package? Sheesh..
The fundamental problem that some of you are having is that by people getting ships ahead of the game release, it automatically makes the game winnable for them and makes them unbeatable in the game.
What's steering you wrong is the ideaology that the game is winnible. Its not.
Every player will have wins and losses.. both as individuals and as organizations.
I really think most of these misunderstandings would be quelled if some of you just took the time to actually read up on all the proposed systems for this game instead of coming to conclusions on things based on what other people have said or think is true.
Anyway, this is the second thread now where people are throwing around random ideas about what the game is and isnt and its getting old, so I'm outties from here on out.
For those of you who get this game, I hope you enjoy it up to release and maybe we'll clip wings in the PU.
-That's illegal, especially when you are the manufacturer and supplier/end-seller or a product. You are setting the price, so any 'savings' you publicise are invented. If you are the only person able to sell something, the price is determined by you and you alone. Apropos, if you say a potential buyer is saving 50% of an invented price, you are still selling something at 100% of the selling price, because that is the price you have set at time of purchase. When a product is not in limited supply, only the price is limited, this is an illegal practice - but I'll agree is very hard to convict as you would need verifiable proof and it is too easy to have two pallets. 'Pallet one is in limited supply, pallet two is not - the first pallet had the offer, the second did not'.
This does not equate to digital downloads as the product is not a tangible item, merely zeros and ones on a hard disk somewhere. So, although they say you are saving money from limited supply, this is just sales patter and totally incorrect. Only dumb people would think it is true.
-That cost is down to the publisher and overall distribution mechanics AKA 'Supply chain hierarchy' , not the developer. Next you'll be telling me they have to cover the cost of fuel for the trucks delivering the boxes.
-I'd like to see your figures please.
Dewd, they used kickstarter - you can't expect people to forget that.
Creativity fuels itself. No one gets into the business for money, that doesn't make any sense. That is, unless you think CR is just interested in money? I don't know but seeing how he didn't sell his house to invest in this game - perhaps you are right?
So, ship loss has no meaning? What's the point in playing the game if there is no risk or loss?
So dumb. That's means the whole risk/reward thing doesn't factor - how is that 'fun'?
1: I think you need to do what you said you would do with the money developed from kickstarter. This game has grown into a personal project by using funds to create a company which then used its own online store to sell virtual items. This is what most have an issue with.
2: I think if the game is good and gets good reviews by its peers, it will be successful with people spending money using MT/DLC during play.
3: So what you are saying is the game is not even in Beta after all this time?
4: Part of the problem I have is spending money on a game before it is complete. Another problem is I am against the amount of money being charged for something which is in Alpha. I won't make comparisons here as there are too many to mention, but this is an overpriced cost for a computer game at this stage of its development.
5: No, it's just a lie.
6: There is nothing wrong with questioning value, perceived or real.
Lol, went mad, did my own trailer:
In general terms I agree. The only difference is I would go further and say wait until the game is released in its entirety before making any judgement whatsoever.
In other words - don't spend money on a game before it has been released and has been reviewed and judged.
I could go further and say don't spend money on a game until you've played it - but that is very hard to do in this day and age without spending money on a game. Some companies still have betas which are free to play, but most only have betas for people who pre-order.
There is certainly a mindset among some players who only buy off steam as they allow refunds, although I am not one of them, I completely understand why this is.
There is a lack of trust in the marketplace. Companies who do not release free-to-play betas on time and schedule, contribute to this.
Well, I wouldn't normally respond to a comment like this and its thinly veiled racism, but having been a casual member of this forum for 12 years, I'd hoped for better sentiment.
No, it doesn't stand for that, and nor will I.
Having said that, as stated, I often change my rig and don't often keep my sig up to date. I ran Star Citizen with medium settings on a i7 Skylake 6700k, 8gb DDR4 2400MHz, and a EVGA GTX 970. And it looked great; I'll update to Pascal and hope to crank the settings up for full visuals.
Got a law you could cite? Because companies do it all the time, and they aren't getting in trouble with the law. I'm willing to believe this over some random guy on the internet claiming it's illegal.
It's from Chris Roberts' speech on Star Citizen at SXSW in 2013. I can't post links or pictures though.
Sale of Goods Act 1979. 1979 CHAPTER 54, 6th December 1979.
As mentioned, it doesn't factor for virtual items, but does for shops and 'real goods'.
If you don't have the figures you can't use them in a discussion to make a point.
Wrong thinking. What matters is the final result. You won't save $85, you will loose $35.
So by that thought process anything you purchase is a loss (which is true) even when purchasing a necessity. Look at everything like an accountant and you'd hoard your money forever...
Put another way the cost to purchase Star Citizen normally is $45 USD. Most AAA games are selling for between $60 and $90 USD at the moment depending on how much the publishers can screw out of you. I'd say the pricing is pretty good IF you are going to purchase the game anyway. If you are on the fence, then by all means wait for the game to come out. The only loss will be a bit of extra cash.
The other thing I find amusing about the cost debate especially the reduction in the starter packs for a limited amount (usually batches of 3000-5000 so not exactly a doorbuster) is the irony of the flipside on that by Steam. Where I live Steam has a 30% cost increase on many major titles which is driven by the Publishers of those titles. Worst offenders are EA, Ubisoft and Activision, all putting prices up in some cases hitting $120 AUD.
Anyway, I still find the negativity and the hang-ups regarding costs and so on rather funny. If people really want to get mad before comprehending what they are reading about then fine, but don't expect people to be all rainbows and ponies in response.
Uhh so what? What are a bunch of AI going to do against a fleet of javelin destroyers? Absolutely nothing, I destroy waves of superior ships in Vanduul Swarm by myself, the AI ****ing sucks.
Great, so a bunch of people who bought giant packs will get to fight each other, that doesn't disprove the point of having a giant advantage at all. GG
Jesus you are dense, the aurora example is especially because it's a starter. While the aurora player is spending hours and hours of his life to just getting slightly better ships, all the pack buyers will have to do is start recruiting/teaming up with other pack buyers; by the time the aurora player has a redeemer, and maybe team up with other redeemers, pack buyers will already have teamed up into giant fleets of destroyers.
There is no beating this unless you join a giant clan.
It's incredibly funny how little you know about this game you are so adamantly defending.
You don't need to earn **** in game, you can buy in-game credits just as you can buy ships; you think someone who spent thousands on ships is going to care about spending hundreds, if not thousands, on credits?
As I said, you can just buy your way into those ACE NPC's.
Uhh there are a million backers, thousands really isn't that farfetched.
Reclaimer: 5,681 ships
Orion: 5,327 ships
Vanguard: 9,001 ships
Those are the amounts sold within 220 hours of their respective concept sales.
You should take up your own advice and actually read up on the game.
You're a joke.
Reclaimer: 5,681 ships
Orion: 5,327 ships
Vanguard: 9,001 ships
Nope. You didn't read what I said. I said the Initial Costs. The games propsed life span is 5 to 10 years with continual development and support. That is not covered in the Initial Costs. You claimed Initial Goals, I didn't agree with that. It's all in the details
Hahaha, you really think that you are trying to debate anything? Your veiled attempts at slander and indirect insults aren't debate, they are just poor attempts to force your opinion on others. Opinion that has very little substance supporting it at that. You think it's a crappy policy to sell some items in a limited amount? Why? It's a form of scarcity marketing and is incredibly common, from the annoying by now and save infomercials to the slightly less annoying method employed here. I'm not saying it's the best method, but it's a method that works as people don't know when it will come on sale again or be sold at the lower price again.
One last thing, don't ever tell me what I think. I think what I think, I don't think it's some great saving, I think if you are interested in Star Citizen then the best time to buy the game is when there is a discount so in essence you save on a purchase you would have made anyway. If you aren't going to get it, then buy it due to being on sale you are by definition an idiot.
Says the guy who hasn't played it for two damn seconds. Wow what a fountain of knowledge you are. I on the other had have played it from it's first playable version with Arena Commander through to the current 2.0.0 PTU iterations. I personally do find it fun.
The only thing I seem to take from your perspective is that you are complaining about something you don't have and likely don't intent to get. So why are you wasting your time whining about it??
Nice job destroying your own argument there. The AI is still being developed, it's not in a final iteration so the AI point is redundant. A fleet of Javelins are unlikely to be in the same instance, primarily due to player counts (aim for 100 per instance in the final revision of the game) so while each instance can contain roughly 100 players, there would be upwards of 1000 NPC's in the same instance, reducing the player impact tremendously.
They'll get to pretty much do what they want with their Javelins. Of which I believe there were only 200 sold total. With even 750,000 people in the game I find running into a Javelin or even a group of Javelins will be relatively uncommon. Even if they stationed a single Javelin in each of the ~200 systems, because of the size of the systems running into one would still be relatively uncommon.
Some people enjoy the journey, others just want all the shiny toys. If you base everything around the desire to have the biggest baddest ship going then you're likely to be disappointed. Case in point a Redeemer is a troop carrier primarily, it's not an efficient space combat ship, a couple of hornet's could destroy it pretty quick if it's flying without an escort.
Why? Why are you trying to beat it? It's a very narrow viewpoint of what you'll be doing in the games world if all you can think of is how to beat a giant clan and it's fleet of Javelins. There's just so much more to think about and do in the gameworld that's being constructed.
Well there's two things here. First yes you can buy ingame credits. Reasoning for this is to reduce the effect of "gold sellers" that plague MMO's like WoW etc...
Second thing is Ace NPC's aren't fully defined yet and there maybe other factors before you can acquire their services, such as faction loyalty, locale and so on. Having the credits available will make their purchase or hiring easier, but still not guaranteed.
So the Reclaimer is a Salvage ship, Orion is a Mining ship and the Vanguard (of which there are more like 20,000 sold now) is a 2 seat long range fighter. What's your point here? Am I just missing something obvious? The Vanguard I guess is likely to prove one of the more effective ingame ships, but we are still yet to see that as it's not flyable yet. Oddly enough though, most ships will have a weakness, even those 200 Javelins or the ~1000 Idris variants.
To quote you "It's incredibly funny how little you know about this game..."
How can you try to make any points when all you do to validate them is belittle and insult your opponent in the discussion. It just casts your arguments in a dull light rather than having a reasoned discussion.
What did I destroy? Enemy AI not being dialed up to masochist difficulty because then nobody would enjoy dogfighting?
The point is AI isn't going to do anything against a fleet of player controlled ships with automated systems.
The javelin isn't the goddamn ****ing point, it's an example.
The point is having a bunch of ships that offer a gigantic advantage.
Another stupid reductionist response, who cares what the redeemer is, it's an example of getting something that's better than what you started with.
And great that you enjoy the journey, I'm happy for you.
Don't tell me, or anyone, how to play/enjoy the game.
And that "beating" was in response to someone saying that you can't "own the universe", well you can and there's nothing a starter bundle player can do about it.
Oh get real with your "reasoning", you can buy ingame credits because it gets CIG money, they even outright state that buying creds helps "funding" the game.
And lmao at your second point, constructing a bunch of nonsense around a system you know nothing about; NPC's can be hired, cost credits, credits can be bought with real money, occam's razor: you can buy credits to hire npc's.
How or when you do this isn't worth debating because unless more is said about the system, there is nothing to debate about
Another stupid response that I was expecting, I could've easily listed numbers from combat/battleships, but your comment on the vanguard already shows the inane direction of responses it would get anyway.
Yes you are missing something obvious, these are expensive ships that give players a gigantic advantage straight out of the gate, and there are thousands of them already out there.
The points I made were to highlight that the examples you stated were easily countered some more effectively others less effectively. If you want a reductionist response, literally look to what you just wrote. There are people who have big ships, there are people who don't. They will all interact in the games universe and as usual there will always be those who get angry cos they can't get the shiny toys instantly, like you. You are worried about ~1000 Idris's and 200 Javelins out of over 750,000 players. There are lots of bigger ships than those in the game.
The reasoning behind CIG making money off selling UEC vs some dodgy company making money off selling UEC is kinda obvious. If you want to dismiss it then fine, but your dismissal of it means nothing.
There's literally no point trying to have a reasoned discussion with you, you have far too much anger and hatred to direct at your opponent. Maybe go take a break and channel your energy into something positive instead??