Star Citizen and Elite Dangerous

[alphaalif]

My friend was bragging to me that SC is has much more than ED. I dont doubt it but from the videos i've seen, their flight and dog fighting mechanics seems pretty easy for me compared to ED. And yes, their ships looks cooler than ED but ED looks realistic to me. What i like about SC is their Zero-Gravity Combat. Maybe SC looks to fantasy to me. I dont know but too much of a good thing might not be good i guess.

ASP Explorer comms

[Jeffers2112]

I might take a look at it when it eventually gets released.
Seems to me that might still take a while, and I can play Elite now!

[Skipp]

People keep forgetting that Star Citizen does not exist atm. The Arena Commander module (basically what CQC will be) is pure crap. You get 2 small ROOMS (i don't want to call it space or areas) to shoot people in IF you actually manage to connect to a match, or just go in and shoot at NPCs. It gets boring after 15min.

Apart from that - the game is non-existant.

When it comes out it will either be the best game of all time, or the biggest flop in history of gaming. Nothing in between.

And yes - Unlike SC, ED is here and now

[Loriath]

I backed SC a long time ago to the tune of $45. I did it base on the fact it is a Genre I love, and Chris Roberts has a history. What he envisioned back then was amazing and I wanted it to happen, so I put up some cash.

Now I wait and see if my $45 will ever allow me to play something. Yes I tried Arena Commander, and it was ok, but not very polished, so I wait.

I got burned long ago when Moon Breakers took a lot of cash from me and then stopped doing anything to make the game better. Yet they still sell on steam even though Imba Entertainment is gone.

No matter what issues ED has, we can and are playing it. It may not quite be what it will be at a later date, but it is far better and has more content that a lot of other games, released or otherwise.

When SC comes, I will be there to beat the daylights over it. I hope its near what they say it will be.

[StaticRadion]

Hate to say it, but originally I backed SC over Elite. In doing so I missed out on some cool extras for Elite and in return got some exclusive content for SC I will probably never use. Don't get me wrong SC looks and feels like it could be a great game... someday. The problem is that the someday seems like it is still far off or will never come.

The constant release of offerings of new or better ship and timed exclusives via the store is an obvious cash grab. It feels like they are hard up for capital even more so that other companies. I mean, they sell ships individually outside of packs for upwards of $400 and have players freely selling ships for $200-$1200. It makes me shake my head and ask if there will even be a way to earn top tier ships in game at release without having to pay to win.

SC could turn out to be a great game but understand that they have used fundraising to net over 87 million not including however much they have secured privately. IDK, I guess we can just sit and hope for the best, but regardless they will release a game no matter the final quality to avoid refunding their backers.

[TorTorden]

Chris Roberts definitely has a history alright, one that clearly put me in (yeah, I'm stoked but I'm not giving him money yet group)

Yes he did make some really great genre defining games but his inability to finish and deliver on his lofty hyped promisses also pretty much single handedly killed it, with a little help from the now annual shooters making more money.

There is a reason Microsoft got rid of him the minute they bought Digital Anvil.

So far FD has pretty much delivered, its a proper space arcade flight game, calling either SC or ED for Sims are quite laughable, Closest to a space sim at this point is Kerbal,,seriously first time building a rocket and landing on the müün was one my life's greatest moments in gaming.

And FD has delivered, granted it has bugs but they have certainly not abandoned it so it is becoming a greater/better game over time.

In fact I think fFD has done the right thing so far, build core game. Publish core game, polish said game, then add to it (yes it needs a lot more polish)

As for funding, the thing with crowdsourcing is thats it is nothing like "investing" if the project flops your are entitled to absolutely bubkiss. If you want something you would have to take him to court and sue him or the company personally.

Kickstarter may have some securities but he only used kickstarter for the first few mil, the rest has been through his own website, quite literally the definition of "Take my money".

There is definitely room in my life for both games, but I'm not giving money away until I actually see a reason for it and he just might completely remove that reason for me with all this "pay to win" stuff.

[Xebeth]

From what I have seen and read, it would appear (to me as an outsider anyway) that SC is a good idea that has spiraled out of control.

It seems that the SC team want to include every possible idea that comes to them in the game, if they can pull it off it'll be great, but there is the danger that it'll end up doing lots of things, but none of them that well.

I also get the feeling that the 'money-men' have taken over, and there a chance that it'll just end up an elitist pay-to-win fest.

FD have taken the more pragmatic approach of getting something out there and then building on it over time. Does this mean we get bugs, yes it does, does it mean we are effectively development testing for them, yes it does. Whilst many people complain about this, it is seen by many industrial experts as a good way of delivery software products.

[Dr.Acula]

Chris Roberts definitely has a history alright, one that clearly put me in (yeah, I'm stoked but I'm not giving him money yet group)

Yes he did make some really great genre defining games but his inability to finish and deliver on his lofty hyped promisses also pretty much single handedly killed it, with a little help from the now annual shooters making more money.

There is a reason Microsoft got rid of him the minute they bought Digital Anvil.

This sounds an awful lot like someone else in the dev world that's constantly done this for the last 10 years....

*mumble grumble not still upset how fable 2 and 3 were ruined*

[Mobius]

another thing to keep in mind that star citizen has only raised 80 million so far, that may sound a lot but considering SC is supposed to be a big epic AAA title, that 80 million may not be enough to get it finished to the quality that your friend expects.
star wars the old republic cost $200 million
GTA5 cost around $250 million.

I backed SC also but after playing what they have released so far and what ive seen so far it just feels like his last game Freelancer.

[lettuceprey]

From what I have seen and read, it would appear (to me as an outsider anyway) that SC is a good idea that has spiraled out of control.

It seems that the SC team want to include every possible idea that comes to them in the game, if they can pull it off it'll be great, but there is the danger that it'll end up doing lots of things, but none of them that well.

I also get the feeling that the 'money-men' have taken over, and there a chance that it'll just end up an elitist pay-to-win fest.

after four digits worth of "investment" into the game, i feel that i agree with this.
i know it's all donations, but i call it an investment because i have felt that i was investing in a really hot game.
i still think so.
however:
it seems that there is just one more thing that needs to be added on, and so we need to rewrite from scratch.
or worse yet there is always a new development in graphics and it just absolutely needs to be put in and needs another rewrite.
i don't need every last NPC to have amazing AI even if i never speak to them as they walk past on the virtual street.
i don't need my graphics card to render every jiggle of my cheeks as i run down the street.
hell, my graphics card has 4 gigs of ram, i have talked to EVGA quite a bit and i DO have it configured correctly and it is still choking on the SC graphics as it is.
so i limit it to 27 FPS.

i could be just impatient, and need to just wait it out.
but i have begun to doubt the deity status of Chris.

FD have taken the more pragmatic approach of getting something out there and then building on it over time. Does this mean we get bugs, yes it does, does it mean we are effectively development testing for them, yes it does. Whilst many people complain about this, it is seen by many industrial experts as a good way of delivery software products.

maybe this is the SC way of "getting something out there and then building on it over time".

well i'm in for a G-note, and i have to just let it ride to the last roll, win or lose.


...