Well, I mean, I would have launched it first (as an AAA game), but I’m no game developer. 🤷 And neither are they, from the looks of it. Good at perpetually raking in money for himself and his family, though!

    • Jojo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s about taking money from people who like spaceships.

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Those are already in the AAAA standard that Ubisoft pioneered with Skull and Bones.

    • littleblue✨@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Seriously. When do the lawsuits start? 🤦🏼‍♂️

      Pfft. Y’all deserve each other. 🤣🤌🏼

      • DaDragon@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Lawsuits for what? They never promised any customer that they would immediately deliver a working end product. As far as I can make out, they offer early access to an in-development product, with your purchase going toward funding development. It’s more akin to a donation with strings (access to the product).

  • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    imagine paying pcgamer for an advertisement like this to shout about dynamic crosshairs and backpack reloading like its fucking 1998.

  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    It never ceases to amazing me how angry people get when a game isn’t perfect and bug free. We want more and more content and graphics with the same amount or less resources, all the while refusing to pay any more for it.

    I miss the days when people were happy with n64 and ps1 graphics. You didn’t need a team of 200 people to put out hyper realistic graphic open world games that people would still shit on.

    Sheesh, I’m glad I’m not in this industry.

    • vasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I’m on the other side of the fence here, amazed that people still bat for a company that can’t deliver a product after what, 10 years past the first estimate release date?

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m not on any side of the fence. I just see these posts shitting on games all the time, and get tired of seeing them. If you don’t like a game fine, don’t play it. But making games is hella difficult. I make indie games in my spare time, and I can honestly say, just making a single player game is hard, let alone a multi-player game, or anything realistic. Like Jesus, if you have such a huge problem with these games, go make a better one yourself.

        • axby@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I agree with you for most games, people are picky and don’t understand the challenges. But this game solicited donations 10 years ago, people bought into the vision, and they were wildly successful, I think they raised $600M, which is like the most money any game has ever raised?

          And despite that, 10 years later, it’s still mostly just a tech demo (edit: perhaps I’m wrong? Maybe there is $40 worth of playable content. See discussion in child comments, I haven’t tried this myself in many years, out of fear of being disappointed again). They are focused on adding cool but superficial animation things, rather than just making a fun playable experience.

          If they were focused on making a fun playable (but possibly buggy and limited) game then it would be different. But instead they seem to be chasing random superficial features like projecting your face from your web cam onto your character. It feels like they are not seriously committed to making even an early access game in a reasonable timeline.

          If this project was funded by some billionaire who wanted to spend 30 years to make the most amazing MMO ever with a ton of never before seen features, then that would be fine. But instead normal people chipped in $40+ to fund this game, and the developers don’t seem to be prioritizing actually making a fun playable game. It’s barely beyond a tech demo even 10 years later (edit: maybe this is not completely accurate). It is reasonable to assume that the management of this project does not care about making a playable game, they can work on whatever fun features they want, they’ve already made a ton of money.

          edits: perhaps I’m wrong about the state of the game. I haven’t tried it in a while. I’ll have to give it another try.

          • WillBalls@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            I agree that the project has fallen victim to arguably the worst example of scope creep to ever plague the gaming industry, but it’s much further along than “barely beyond a tech demo”. I know people who play several hours a week and say they’re having a great time. There’s definitely a full game in the alpha, but it’s far from polished or finished.

            To your point about feeling different about the slow development if it were funded by a single investor rather than crowdsourcing: what’s the difference? Every person I know who’s spent money on star citizen seems happy with their RoI. Isn’t that all that matters with an investment? I’m not sure why it would be better if it was just a single investor being happy rather than a million investors being happy, even if it is all just delusion.

            • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              Every person I know who’s spent money on star citizen seems happy with their RoI

              Every person you know personally? Most comment sections I’ve seen discussing Star Citizen seems to have at least one or two people who are unhappy with their roi. Personally, I don’t feel like I’ve been able to get my full money’s worth yet. I think I will some day, I know it’s more than a tech demo, but the gameplay isn’t quite there yet and the game is still really buggy and unoptimized.

              If they can release Squadron 42 this year or next, I think that’d really start to turn things around for them more than anything else

              • osprior@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Let’s be honest the people who would defend their ROI have lost interest in defending it to the unwilling. Star Citizen has become a cat call to all the haters whenever it’s posted in general gaming (namely r/games and c/games now) communities. The only way the narrative changes is by showing not telling, and that only happens with further polishing like this article is covering, and in future release.

                There is a reason they’ve successfully increased pledge numbers year over year, you just don’t hear from people outside that community due to this stigma that’s not worth bothering to explain.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Why do laser weapons have recoil? Don’t ask. “I think you need recoil in order to balance the game and make it fun for everybody,” explains Greim.

    photons have momentum

    • Jojo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Okay I did some math. If the gun shot a single photon with all the energy of a .50BMG from an M2 heavy machine gun, it would have about 1.2e-4 Ns of momentum. For reference, the bullet it’s compared to would have 38.3 Ns. So the photon has about 32000 times less momentum than a bullet. Do with that what you will.