Main › Star Citizen – General Discussions
- December 11, 2015 at 11:49 am #1912
- March 7, 2016 at 5:46 am #2678
I don’t agree that most of what you said is what actually happened. [/quote]
That’s fine. But it only means that you haven’t been keeping track or keeping up.March 7, 2016 at 12:49 am #2677
I don’t know did anyone point this out, it has to do with SC’s art direction. Everything is as complicated as you can imagine, like they cant find a better way to cram in as many polygon feature as possible, all those ships are way over detailed for their own good, everything in your sight has like 100 moving parts. Worse is those aren’t pure eye sour. It seems SC want those “parts” to have a meaning, which means each one is an object that has a roster of status to keep track, engine avionic weapon and other modules. The complicated ship objects has damage status, damage visual effect. Add this on top of the ship variety with complex state to set them apart, add all of these to FPS perspective, to the “seamless loading”. While everything is rendered in Crysis like visual. Most PC can barely run this standalone, even the high end gears cannot fully take on this challenge. Now this is “standalone”, SC is an MMO that play over the internet, there will be a shit load of data to transmit, things are already lagging and broken with handful people testing, what will happen when you have like something 100 multi-crew ship screwing around the verse in the same server at same time? Remember this is just for a bunch ships in void, the game also promise rich environmental factors in a unbelievably large universe, things like you can access every detail on a map, procedural generated planets, and remember, all of these are rendered in Crysis graphic. Are we going to have a dedicated fiber optic express just for this? Im not familiar with internet gaming, but I suppose there is a reason why internet game usually cant look as good as standalone game. MMOs like WOW was way behind in graphic even back then, does that have a thing to do with “bandwidth”?? Correct me if Im wrong. I predict they cant even deliver 10% of their promise, when money is running out, there will be cuts, rushes, and desperation to cover their ass, the final product will be totally FUBR, poor fans may keep looking their ship in a hanger while it last, playing in the real verse can be dangerous, sense the program is unpredictable, 1000 dollar ship can disappear for no reason, once its gone in the verse, its are gone. The dev is in full steam to model JPEG, cook more staged demo, milk the last of the hardcore fans down to the last penny.March 6, 2016 at 10:19 am #2676March 6, 2016 at 9:46 am #2675
[quote quote=2671]I think my comments have been pretty clear. Anyone reading my blogs, specifically The End Game one you cited, can see that most of what I said in there, is pretty much what has happened. Right down to the missive I posted on Twitter last week about being proven right that the game – as pitched – couldn’t be made. They have proven me right by continuing to not only chop promised features, but also by implementing (as per 2.2) features that are just fluff, which were never discussed nor planned etc. The fact of the matter is, the stunts (e.g. releasing a half-assed mPU 2.0 to show progress) they pulled in Q4/15, gave them a huge revenue boost which nobody (least of all me) was expecting. Compare that to the fact that the split (a prediction I made in Oct) of SC and SQ42 was pretty much flat and didn’t gain the revenue they thought they would. However, they still made money from it. Regardless, it’s all immaterial because at their estimated $3M per month burn rate, eventually they will have mass layoffs and/or the whole thing will collapse.[/quote]
I don’t agree that most of what you said is what actually happened. But I don’t want to get into a tit-for-tat argument about that — we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I think most people can read the posts & tweets for themselves and make up their own minds. Secondly, there is another possible outcome for the project besides mass layoffs & total collapse. And that is that they deliver enough of a game within the next year to establish a sustainable source of revenue — which will allow them to continue development on a long-term basis. People may disagree about the relative probabilities of these two alternative outcomes, but the question is still far from settled.March 6, 2016 at 8:02 am #2674
[quote quote=2673]Ok to put it simply : try removing the ‘Derek Smart component’ from the equation. I would honnestly be interested in what makes you think CIG is not on the fail path. [/quote]
My opinions on the subject have nothing to do with Derek, Chris Roberts, or anyone else. Frankly, when I see multi-page emotional diatribes on both sides of the issue, my brain automatically tunes out — I just can’t take them seriously. I try to form opinions based on facts that are not open to interpretation (as much as possible — if there aren’t enough facts, I defer judgment). I suspected the 90-day doomsday timeline from Derek was highly unlikely even back then — all one had to do was take into account that they were still pulling in backer money at a considerable rate and apply that fact to your analysis.
That said, I am on the fence as to the ultimate outcome of the project. I want it to succeed, but don’t know if CIG can sustain their funding long enough for it to have a chance.March 6, 2016 at 7:02 am #2673
Indeed. And as some of the things he said have happened, others have not, and you could say he’s wrong. But he never claimed he was making predictions around.
But I’ll try to explain myself the best I can; as you can see [read]I’m not native english speaker.
The point is not Derek Smart really.
Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems you are trying to counter what Derek Smart says, because it seems to you that he’s kinda the man that drove all of us (call us followers if you like) against CIG, and is merely saying crap . CIG advertising about it was : ‘Derek is the bad guy, makes people fear and doubtfull >>> his fault, him alone, one man against 100M$ company, and the power to rally every cig desillusioned backers to his crusade. When on contrary, we landed on this blog only because we started worrying about what was happening at CIG AND because this place was one of the first place to be opinion free, visible, and notorious. To be honnest I had never heard of Derek Smart before late july 2015, and had my opinion on CIG and Mr Roberts way before, when actually they had failed to release any star marine back in January then March 2015. Then it all become clear to me that the weekly newsletters about star marine were all fillers and lies. This is how I started to question CIG. Then it’s all a pattern, everything fits in, every delays, shaddy letters, shaddy moves etc, it all makes sense when you start to face facts VS belief.
This is what people that are still believing in CIG fail to see. We are not driven by Derek Smart, it just happens he does have the same opinion as we do, add to it the notoriety and the insights so yeah of course he is way more visible.
Ok to put it simply : try removing the ‘Derek Smart component’ from the equation.
I would honnestly be interested in what makes you think CIG is not on the fail path.March 6, 2016 at 6:37 am #2672
[quote quote=2668]@josquin Thing is : when Derek is wrong he gladly admits it. I take as an example when he said that those two dinosaurus (Braben and Roberts) can’t connect with the gamers anymore. That was 3 years ago when E:D and S:C were announced. Just ask him now and you’ll see. Now, he never said ‘CIG will fall by end of january’ nostradamus style. You are making it a prediction. He said in his opinion that would be surprising . I here, don’t go all out if he’s wrong on that one or others (cause yes he’s wrong on many things too). Why don’t I go all out ? because Derek Smart didn’t ask any of my money. And because the real thing is >>> Cig has’nt fallen yet, but have they release anything substancial? no. Soooooo you can try to tip everything Derek Smart and Chris Roberts said, and try to analyse, investigate it etc etc . No. Who cares. CIG has’nt released anything that looks like a game so far. This is worrying. Thats the only thing important. [/quote]
They’re idiots who can’t tell the difference between sarcasm, tongue-in-cheek, or predictions. This is precisely what I said:
1st Roberts, then Braben. These digital dinos think they can disappear, return – then assume they can connect with gamers. Right.
— Derek Smart (@dsmart) November 7, 2012March 6, 2016 at 6:35 am #2671
That said, anyone who regards me as an un-biased source for all things related to this train wreck, only have themselves to blame if I’m off about something. However – thus far – every single thing I’ve said and written – has YET to be disproved.
Is that a reference to the prediction you made back in October about the entire project folding before end of Q1/2016? Technically you still have 4 weeks to be proven right about that… [/quote]
You know how predictions and analysis work?
That’s why analysts are hardly ever correct; because it’s all about data that is available at the time of the analysis.
I think my comments have been pretty clear. Anyone reading my blogs, specifically The End Game one you cited, can see that most of what I said in there, is pretty much what has happened. Right down to the missive I posted on Twitter last week about being proven right that the game – as pitched – couldn’t be made. They have proven me right by continuing to not only chop promised features, but also by implementing (as per 2.2) features that are just fluff, which were never discussed nor planned etc.
The fact of the matter is, the stunts (e.g. releasing a half-assed mPU 2.0 to show progress) they pulled in Q4/15, gave them a huge revenue boost which nobody (least of all me) was expecting. Compare that to the fact that the split (a prediction I made in Oct) of SC and SQ42 was pretty much flat and didn’t gain the revenue they thought they would. However, they still made money from it. Regardless, it’s all immaterial because at their estimated $3M per month burn rate, eventually they will have mass layoffs and/or the whole thing will collapse.
The topic ‘Star Citizen – General Discussions’ is closed to new replies.