dsmart
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
We saw this coming a mile away though. They have been focused on making money.
Also, post-release (lol!!), they have no way of making enough revenue to sustain all the instances (Google Compute is not cheap), patching and the cost of running four studios etc.
This is why the 2.0 kernel is going to remain a broken mess (like AC) right through to the eventual collapse because the only revenue stream they have atm is selling ships, SQ42 (which is a non-starter since over 700K people are already entitled to it) – and nothing else since there is no “game”, hence no in-game “economy”.
2016 is going to be very interesting and I expect some major events in Q1/16.
They try to justify it by saying that when you logged after the first ToS, you agreed to the second and the third. Of course if you sue, then they have to prove that you did in fact login and agree to that ToS change.
And since there is an arbitration clause in the ToS, a bunch of people can’t get a class action lawsuit together in order to challenge the ToS as it relates to refunds, let alone the game.
Yeah, I saw that. It’s full of so many holes that it would take an entire blog post to document all of them. Bottom line, it’s the same crap he posts in order to continue selling empty promises.
Most of his missive is bollocks.
the biggest yet in gaming
Seamless fps, space, planetary combat has been in Universal Combat (free on Steam btw) since 2004. Including EVA (as a Space Force Marine)
Elite Dangerous currently features the largest gaming world in existence. Second would be my Battlecruiser/Universal Combat games
80,000 backers have explored Crusader in 2.0 in the week since its launch
yes, he’s actually celebrating this. This despite the fact that the actual backers is probably around 300K-500K; but they still refuse to give actual numbers
2.0 shows the naysayers it can be done!
So Chris thinks that the shoddy 2.0 which isn’t even 10% of the game promised, “proves it can be done”.
Oh wow. Some German guys put together some performance tests for Star Citizen. Yikes. Sure it’s alpha and all, but if look at the online vs offline, it is easy to see that even with optimizations, the issues remain with online play. This guy said it best.
A lot of key people have already left since July and more will be leaving this period, going into the new year. This nonsense with mini-PU 2.0 and their rust to get some version of SQ42 out, are the clear indicators that in all likelihood something catastrophic is going to happen in 2016.
@BB They have a CE3 source license. Which means they can do what they want with it. As long as they continue to pay the support licensing fees, they will continue to get updates (new features, bug fixes etc). The problem is that merging in those updates in their custom engine built with CE3, is a huge problem.
We do the same thing with the custom engine we built for Line Of Defense using Havok Vision. We merged their updates up to a certain point, then we stopped because our own custom engine built from it had so many changes that it takes a long time to merge. I suspect that’s the same issues that they are faced with as well.
Also, add-ons like VR are additional license fees to CryTek. My guess is that there won’t be a VR version of the game because the engine would have deviated so much that they simply won’t be able to do it. Assuming they even have a VR license; which my sources tell me they don’t have at the time it was told to me.
A crappy game launched has no impact on the engine license because we all know that having the best engine doesn’t guarantee a quality game.
