Star Citizen Hits $24 Million With Hot New Trailer
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Yes I'm amused how are people so concerned and doubtful while they haven't spent
time on finding out basic information.You know the men behind the wheel actually
started a firm called Digital Anvil which was later on sold to Microsoft...and you
are saying "how they've racked up $24m before even giving us a direct indication of what their game actually is"
Very first trailer was "I'm the PC game" "And I'm the space sim".And Chris is someone who
made Wing commander.Now connect all dots together.
I encourage you to read couple of Chris R. articles and you will realize that he's been in business for
so long that he doesn't care about money, reputation is really all he got and he
aim to keep it.He's building game of his dream that is not being halt by petty
publisher wishes and that's strong idea that is carrying game and people forward.
If that won't be enough he's doing open development:Every friday is stream - showcasing
dev members, answering questions from fans, showing their offices, talking about their
work, having interviews...
Then you have articles on patch updates, then you have forum where's section which
servers for asking question directly to specific people in development group from
audio engineer to lead designer to 3D designer.Developers are often on forums, on
chat really being active with people...
time on finding out basic information.You know the men behind the wheel actually
started a firm called Digital Anvil which was later on sold to Microsoft...and you
are saying "how they've racked up $24m before even giving us a direct indication of what their game actually is"
Very first trailer was "I'm the PC game" "And I'm the space sim".And Chris is someone who
made Wing commander.Now connect all dots together.
I encourage you to read couple of Chris R. articles and you will realize that he's been in business for
so long that he doesn't care about money, reputation is really all he got and he
aim to keep it.He's building game of his dream that is not being halt by petty
publisher wishes and that's strong idea that is carrying game and people forward.
If that won't be enough he's doing open development:Every friday is stream - showcasing
dev members, answering questions from fans, showing their offices, talking about their
work, having interviews...
Then you have articles on patch updates, then you have forum where's section which
servers for asking question directly to specific people in development group from
audio engineer to lead designer to 3D designer.Developers are often on forums, on
chat really being active with people...
I can understand the concern though to be honest. We still have not seen any real in-game footage since the original backing video. The hanger module is good and all and gives you an idea of what we are getting but that alone is not enough in my opinion. Still I have pledged about $450 so far and will give CIG all the time they need to make their masterpiece perfect, I'm just saying that I can understand some people's concerns.Ultratwinkie said:
We've seen all of this and more from other games. Past merit is nothing, zip, otherwise we would be flooded with great games.enex said:
I read a lot from Chris Roberts and quite frankly, very often he comes off as pretentious and arrogant. From someone who hasn't made a game in a long long time, that is something I don't like at all. Didn't like it in Peter Molyneaux, didn't like it in Richard Garriott, don't like it here.
Article and Patch updates, Dev's on Forums and whatnot, this is all REQUIRED. This is nothing special. They got a lot of money from people and they keep taking more. Obviously that wouldn't work if they were just quiet.
So all your points really tell me NOTHING about what the game will be. I have no answers how they want to tackle the inherent problems of a Sandbox environment that is supposed to be open but fair at the same time. They haven't told me how they want to tackle the economy, they haven't shown any actual combat, they haven't shown anyone flying ships, they haven't shown how onboard and in space interactions should occur. In short, they've shown pretty graphics so far and promised a HUGE universe.
TL;DR:
So far, it's all been talk and nothing to show and the talk has all been vague and theoretical, with very few straightforward solutions and answers apart from "we want to..." and "we plan to..." .
P.S.: Being critical and cautious about the development of this project does not make me a hater. I loved Wing Commander, I desperately want this to be successful and I backed the project because of that. That doesn't stop me from being very critical with what I am seeing.
First thanks to responding to my post.I feel strongly that people have become super cautious in a defenseNKRevan said:
of shareholders interest of big publishers.But this is different breed.
I will try to explain why I see this development as solid.Star citizen could be developed closed and in 2 years
we would get finished product.But no they are opening interative developement so when they finish eg: ship they
push it in update and if you bought it you can admire it in your hanger.Chris said that this early he wouldn't
show build to publisher yet we can.Next it's his years - he's not in for money, he said multiple times that
as developer all you got in reputation and he aim to keep it as best he can.He aim to build the game he loves
with all his heart and he said it over and over again over past year so what is chance he's repulsive liar
or passionate game developer?
Economy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0qXEAqYIH8
Again, all you are telling me is that he is showing some neat graphics and doing a lot of talking. The Hangar Module is a joke. Yeah, it looks nice, but it tells you NOTHING about the game except how it -might- look at very specific points in the game.enex said:
And please...that whole...he's not in it for the money thing...what does that have to do with anything? One, it's promotional speak and while most certainly true to an extent, he also has to pay people, so yes, he is also in it for the money. Games do not get made from the passion of developers alone, especially not when you aim for something as enormous as Star Citizen and when that game will have to keep adding things in order to stay viable.
MOST game developers I know are passionate individuals. They want to make great games and they love what they are doing. Otherwise they wouldn't be working in this industry. This is not a job you go into for the money. That doesn't guarantee that the game being made will turn out great and it doesn't change that I STILL have no idea what Star Citizen will play like.
Lastly. I saw the video you linked. I do follow Star Citizens development. But that didn't answer any of my concerns. It's a theory. It doesn't talk about how mixing NPC with player driven economy will balance out. It doesn't explain anything apart from a concept of how missions will be generated in the game.
And you know what, he doesn't HAVE to explain it. But the fact remains then, that I have no clue how the game will work. I have vague theories and concepts. But no solids. And considering what was promised, that is reason for concern (read, the scope of the project is so massive that it is hard to trust them on their talk alone).
While I threw some money the game early on, I have to admit that I've always been rather sceptical that the rather grand promises about the graphics would ever actually be realised. But the more news I see come out, the more convinced I am that he might actually mange to pull it off. For the graphics at least. Whether the actual gameplay turns out as good remains to be seen.Andy Chalk said:
I'm pretty sure those images were, in fact, generated by a computer. It was produced by the game engine rather than as a pre-rendered cinematic, but it's still very much CGI.Ronin Toshiro said:
No it's not CGI, the cut-scenes that Final Fantasy (and others) produce is CGI. What you are seeing there is all in-engine however the guy that makes these video's adds in certain special effects like bloom lighting to make it look a bit special. You will not see it like the video's while you are playing the game.Kahani said:
Yes, it is CGI. Words mean things. Using words to mean things that they don't actually mean is stupid and extremely unhelpful if you want to be understood. CGI means Computer Generated Imagery, as opposed to alternatives such as hand-drawn animation or filming real objects. The imagery in the Star Citzen video was generated by a computer. This is not a complicated thing to understand.Corralis said:
I am pumped! Come on and release, I want to play!
*rocks in chair*
Star Citizen, I've given you my money. If I had more, I'd give you that too! Stop making me want you sooner!
Actually...
Keep making me want you sooner!
[sub]
[/sub]
*rocks in chair*
Star Citizen, I've given you my money. If I had more, I'd give you that too! Stop making me want you sooner!
Actually...
Keep making me want you sooner!
[sub]
[/sub]Nice to see another person who knows what words mean. The avatar suits the post.Kahani said:
Biggest thing to happen to space games since the joystick was invented or Biggest possible disaster waiting to happen that buries the genre for another 10 years.
I back this thing twice and all I can do is pray to the nine golden leprechaun gods of New New Terra that it is a mind blowing experience. To bad it's probably going to take several years for them to get anywhere close to the pitch.
I back this thing twice and all I can do is pray to the nine golden leprechaun gods of New New Terra that it is a mind blowing experience. To bad it's probably going to take several years for them to get anywhere close to the pitch.
OK so by that reckoning then every computer game we play is entirely made in CGI? Nah CGI directly refers to the cutscenes in games regardless of what the words actually mean. Back in the early days of gaming it was referred as FMV or Full Motion Video but that term seems to have been replaced by CGI cause we don't use real actors in computer games anymore. I get what you mean but it's just that the term CGI is not used to describe in-engine scenes, at least not as I understand it anyway.Kahani said:
Your understanding is faulty. Both prerendered and realtime rendered (in-game) scenes are CGI.Corralis said:
Yes. Obviously.Corralis said:
No. The term to refer to cut-scenes in games is "cut-scenes", or more generally "cinematics". Those cinematics are usually CGI, for obvious reasons, but do sometimes use live action or other methods instead.
Close. But more accurately, the term CGI is not normally used to describe anything to do with video games at all. It's a term from the film industry, and isn't used to talk about video games because, as already explained, it's completely redundant. If you want to distinguish between things like pre-rendered and in-engine, you use terms that actually distinguish between them (I recommend "pre-rendered" and "in-engine", for reasons that are hopefully obvious), not one that explicitly includes both by definition and, importantly, which is understood by everyone to include both. Hence the answer to the first part of your post - every computer game we play is entirely CGI, which is why no-one uses the term to talk about computer games. This isn't arguing about a commonly used term in an evolving language, it's usage of a term that I've never seen before and probably never will again because it simply doesn't make the slightest bit of sense.
Even if it flops, I doubt it will bury the genre. There are quite a few [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_flight_simulator_games#Space_flight_simulator_games_under_development] other space sims around. Even if it's a success the genre will never be as big as it once was, but as long as they don't all end up as failures I don't think it will kill the genre.1337mokro said: