-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Vapourware Scam Citizen - Only people with too much money can become StarCitizens! WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW MORE?
- Thread starter Morgoth
- Start date
Quoting myself from the Starfield thread.
Apologize to this man right now.
Val the Moofia Boss
Scholar
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2022
- Messages
- 1,230
As much as I rag on SC, I wasn't very impressed by Starfield. It seems like a lesser SC, albeit it is singleplayer so you're not at the mercy of server problems and you will be able to mod your game, and with the Besthseda modding community you're going to have a lot of mods. Then again, that also brings with it the usual problems of Bethseda modding: the aggravation of trying to create compatibility patches, figuring out the correct load order... 20 hours of work only for it to all fall apart in the end, and you getting a better experience just going without mods (at least, in my experience).
Myobi
Liturgist
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,501
Oh Starfield gameplay, well, it's a bugthesda game, how big can your hopes be?
Also, isn't it weird that the community that makes such a big fuzz about "haters" is always the first one pulling the trigger when it comes to other space games?
Edited: Oh damn...
To be fair, using the words "fleshed out" when talking about a Bethesda game sounds crazy.
Also, isn't it weird that the community that makes such a big fuzz about "haters" is always the first one pulling the trigger when it comes to other space games?
Edited: Oh damn...
To be fair, using the words "fleshed out" when talking about a Bethesda game sounds crazy.
Last edited:
Perkel
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2014
- Messages
- 16,238
Yeah Starfield seems like huge slap to CGI on surface. Imho it won't really do much in long run.
1. Single player vs multiplayer. Obvious is obvious huge part of SC appeal is running ship with friends.
2. Random vs Unique - SC tries to achieve what people this is impossible fully hand made star systems. Yes they use procedural generation but more like a tool for artist that allows him to create biome on planet in way he wants rather than just proc generator ala elite.
3. ARMA vs Potato - SC is basically ARMA in space where Starfield will be more or less Skyrim with spaceships + some flying. We are yet to see any detail on where we can land but it seems like landing spots will be precreated so you can't land where you want.
4. Simulation vs Static - Starfield will be static game where everything waits for player. SC tries to go into sim aspect where stuff will happen regardless if player is there to witness it.
One thing is sure. SC will have good competitor for bugs.
1. Single player vs multiplayer. Obvious is obvious huge part of SC appeal is running ship with friends.
2. Random vs Unique - SC tries to achieve what people this is impossible fully hand made star systems. Yes they use procedural generation but more like a tool for artist that allows him to create biome on planet in way he wants rather than just proc generator ala elite.
3. ARMA vs Potato - SC is basically ARMA in space where Starfield will be more or less Skyrim with spaceships + some flying. We are yet to see any detail on where we can land but it seems like landing spots will be precreated so you can't land where you want.
4. Simulation vs Static - Starfield will be static game where everything waits for player. SC tries to go into sim aspect where stuff will happen regardless if player is there to witness it.
One thing is sure. SC will have good competitor for bugs.
1. So you're not comparing Starfield to Squadron 42? Why is that?
2. I take it you are unfamiliar with how Empyrion Galactic Survival operates then. It is all procedural generation and is pretty challenging too boot.
3. Scam Citizen isn't comparable to anything on the market. It's a pre-alpha game built off the copium of the deluded. Hell ARMA has more players on a single map then what Scam Citizen can do without requiring magic technology that doesn't exist.
4. Scam Citizen is static as well. You just admitted to it when you said that it is hand crafted star system. You don't get to claim multiple star system since CGI hasn't even finished the first one.
Scam Citizen is one big bug and you love it.
1.) Because Squadron 42 isn't publicly observable to be compared. I don't like talking about Squadron 42 because I don't follow it enough. I don't give a shit about Squadron 42. I've never given a shit about Squadron 42. When a build comes out I'll play it and enjoy it and move on because it's only meant to be the prologue to Star Citizen but let's look at the things we can compare between the two that you can use Star Citizen as a reference. It's not like they're going to remove atmospheric flight from Squadron 42 when we have it in Star Citizen. Starfield doesn't seem to have atmospheric flight, as such it appears landing and taking off are cutscenes presumably with a loadscreen attached to it. Star Citizen doesn't have loadscreens so I'd imagine Squadron 42 wouldn't either. The comparisons between Star Citizen and Starfield are for the most part extremely superficial but I think in areas that count... The comparison will be unfavorable towards Starfield and Star Citizen remains impressive when you account for the scale and the fact that it's multiplayer.
2.) Procgen is a powerful tool in the right hands. You think Bethesda qualifies as the "right hands"? Procgen relies on emergent gameplay scenarios and Bethesda's idea of "emergent gameplay" are boring radiant quests that have been rehashed between three of their games without much of a difference. What reason do I have to believe Starfield will improve on this in a significant way?
3.) If it were precedented and feasible using the tools we currently have, it would have been done by someone else by now. Star Citizen is ARMA levels of simulation in space across multiple planets in a singular system as of now. They're aiming to expand that by the end of the year in Evocati.
4.) The only thing missing from Stanton is an asteroid field with a jump point to the next system. If they added that jump point structure without it being functional the anti-SC brigade would piss and shit themselves over missing functionality and use it as ammunition against the game. So what do you propose? Add it in superficially so we can say Stanton is a 100% finished system? Or should they wait until it can actually be used? Stanton is 99.995% complete right now and they're sitting on much more content because they physically can't fit it into the game.
Project management 101: Development resources are finite and throwing more resources at problems doesn't solve them quicker. Complex problems take time and they have more than enough funding coming in to keep development ongoing until they get resolved. Ultimately the thing I don't understand is what's the damn rush? We're getting updates on a quarterly basis delivering more and more of what was promised and it's already enjoyable so why the hate?
1. So you admit to choosing to make an invalid comparison between two dissimilar things because of your retardation. You have no argument then princess.
2. This is you searching for an argument by creating a strawman to attack me with. I never said one word about Bugthesda you moron. I suggest you go back and re-read what I wrote. You will see I mentioned another game as a basis for my argument. Now if you really want to get down to the brass tacks with Bugthesda and procedural generation done right then look no further than Daggerfall. The most of towns and dungeons are procedurally generated at runtime. That was a game made 26 years ago. Thus, you argument is in another castle princess.
3. Behold hiding behind the Magic Technology excuse to deflect any and all criticism from your cult. Scam Citizen can't even hold more than 50 players on a server while ARMA 3 has an uncapped limit. ARMA 3 wins. Also, ARMA3 was released a decade ago while Scam Citizen is still in pre-alpha a decade later.
4. Thank you for confirming that the single star system is not complete and that you can't make claims about multiple star systems to argue against what Starfield can do.
Project Management 101: Don't rip off your customers and lie to them about what products are for sale. Don't pick an engine that is incapable of doing what you need it do. Don't string along your customers and make them join a cult. There I fixed all of Chrissie Roberts problems with proper advice.
It's funny watching cultists defend fair maiden Chrissie Roberts honor. If he told you to drink arsenic laced Koolaide you would do it in a heartbeat.
I'm citing Starfield and giving you some leeway on the discussion of procgen because I know more about that than I do about some shitty early access survival game that you're referencing that looks and plays like shit. I'm very much aware of Daggerfall as it's my favorite game of all time. Todd was a junior hire at the time and had very little to do with it. I'm also aware that everyone notable from that team left almost 25 years ago. Also no engine is capable of doing what Star Citizen is doing by default that's why they bought the source code years before Unreal Engine became what it did and went open source themselves you moron. It's funny that you're using ARMA 3 as an argument when they've had the same growing pains that Star Citizen has and it's now selling ARMA Lite on a new engine to continue financing development of both ARMA 4 and their new engine because the old one couldn't handle it. Go ahead and play one of those highly populated ARMA servers my friend. Everything that you criticize Star Citizen for? Happens with ARMA too despite being at a much lower scale and level of fidelity.
Go choke on a cock or ten.
Go choke on a cock or ten.
Myobi
Liturgist
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,501
Don't forget that bit where ADL brought up ARMA as well. I cited Empyrion Galactic Survival. I never played ARMA in my life, but I did play Empyrion.
Myobi
Liturgist
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,501
Another thing is...
I never touched fucking ARMA in my life either, but does it also sell "microtransactions" in form of concept art, up to thousands of dollars, during its alpha build after a decade of development?
Also, what kind of fucking argument is: “AH AH you criticize X but Y also does it!”?
Honestly, if you actually want to support CiG, stop talking, you are fucking awful at this shit, you are not just embarrassing yourself, you are embarrassing the company even further and they seriously don’t need your help for that sort shit.
It's just pure cultism at this point. We bring up valid concerns and we're made fun of by them.
Val the Moofia Boss
Scholar
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2022
- Messages
- 1,230
I have played ARMA 1 and I can see the comparison, with the focus on realism and immersion in a sandbox. If and when AI crewmembers are ever added to Star Citizen then I'd imagine that the parallels would become a lot more obvious, with the player being able to sit in a turret and command their team from there, ordering AI teammates into trucks and telling them where to go, telling them which seats to sit in, positioning themselves on either side of a door entrance so they're ready to shoot any pursuers who come through, telling them to hold their fire so you can remain stealthed or to volley fire on command, telling them to drop their weapons or pick up a different weapon etc. Hopefully AI crewmates are at least as sophisticated as in ARMA, but given how the NPCs in SC have been borked for half a decade, I'm not very optimistic.
Gargaune
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2020
- Messages
- 3,610
I dunno, man, that's a nice argument you have there. It'd be a shame if some modders added Starfield multiplayer before Star Citizen released...
Mhm. Hey, by the by, when was SQ42 supposed to be "publicly observable" in the original pitch? 'Cause next year, I might spend seventy bucks and "publicly observe" the shit out of Starfield.
If only Star Citizens remembered that before they bought their next .JPG.
Myobi
Liturgist
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,501
I don't give a shit if people are sharing valid criticism, shit posting or mocking each other ass's, as long as they make it entertaining.
... but all that fucking dude makes me feel is depressed, it's like watching someone being mentally disabled by choice, a paid fucking choice, poor sod can't shill or even insult someone properly, it's just stuck there drooling over the post ratings trying to hit the butt picture without hurting himself in the process.
The original pitch is irrelevant. Why do you want a 2 million dollar game according to a 2 million dollar game's development timeline so bad when they've raised over $475 million to date? Personally I want to see what they come up with given unprecedented amounts of money. So far it's worked out pretty well. Chris Roberts has always been an innovator stifled by the moneymen and now money is not an issue as they're raising it faster than they can spend it no matter how many people they hire. It's cool and the single system we have has more content than the 100 systems would have in the original pitch. By the time we get some sort of minimum viable product for a soft-launch we'll likely have 4 or 5 systems just as big as Stanton is. Before I get the whole "accountability to backers" spiel, anyone from that original pitch had until 2017 to get a refund with ease. That was three, arguably four years of knowing that the game had grown well beyond the original pitch including one year of the persistent universe being playable to backers. Now it's harder to get that refund as it should be given that they've been running the game as a live service for the past five years.
Despite all that, even though I think anyone unhappy deserves to be parted with their money and feel burned out of principle of waiting this long to decide they want a refund, those fuckers can still go online and sell their pledge for probably more than double what they paid ten years ago so anyone clutching their pearls over the whole backer accountability argument can fuck right off.
Also turns out I was right about Starfield's on foot and space segments being completely instanced from each other. The disappointment from Starfield will push Star Citizen to a billion dollars crowdfunded by 2026.
Despite all that, even though I think anyone unhappy deserves to be parted with their money and feel burned out of principle of waiting this long to decide they want a refund, those fuckers can still go online and sell their pledge for probably more than double what they paid ten years ago so anyone clutching their pearls over the whole backer accountability argument can fuck right off.
A completely valid one when Star Citizen in it's pre-alpha state is continuously getting shit on for what ARMA has openly sold on the market as a released product and gotten away with since 2007. There's a lot of similarities when it comes to gameplay and tech but Star Citizen's scale far exceeds ARMA.
Don't give a shit about the microtransactions that you'll earn by playing the game within extremely reasonable amounts of play. I've gone on record many times saying that if ship sales are what it takes to get $550 million to crowdfund an unprecedented sci-fi life sim/space sim/immersive sim made then so be it. My $55 ship competes against ships worth hundreds of dollars in PvE and PvP so the whole pay2win argument is overblown bullshit made by people who don't even play the game. If you start with an Aurora, you'll have an Avenger Titan AKA the jack of all trades within the first couple hours and that's accounting for learning the game. If you knew what you were doing, you'd earn it in 90 minutes or less.
Also turns out I was right about Starfield's on foot and space segments being completely instanced from each other. The disappointment from Starfield will push Star Citizen to a billion dollars crowdfunded by 2026.
Perkel
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2014
- Messages
- 16,238
Because SQ42 is completely different type of game than SC and Starfield is. Starfield has more in common with SC than with SQ42. SQ42 is mostly linear cinematic game based on missions rather than open world sandbox. The whole point of it is to play space sim in set of missions that makes you think you are in movie or something.
SC on other hand is you starting from nothing, taking jobs, exploring, buying better bigger ships, maybe making a colony, doing some quests for people etc. which is very similar to starfield but with other people and without player stats.
You can have hand crafted system and completely dynamic economy quests at the same time. OR mix of it etc. You can have dynamic quests where no one waits for you to show up which is what currently happens in some jobs. Like some player is hacking into SAT and you get quest to defend that site. If you don't go there dude will be able to clean his record avoiding prison time but if you show up and take him out dude goes to prison for presumably good amount of time.
We don't know enough about starfield but i doubt Betsheda created some sort of world simulation.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.