All good & well in demo. I'll believe it when a bunch of people can show me this works for people "outside your instance".

Took them that long to fix twitching camera.

Is it just me or does everything look fuzzy as fuck whenever the player walks around?

Also

>Barely working game
>albeit great potential
>people cheering and hollering as though in a religious fervor

I was wondering how candidates like trump can even get anywhere, but I understand now.

>NOT A CULT

>>58500
>people cheering
Yeah, too bad fucking SPACE ENGINEERS already has the ability to land on planets in real time. Fuck, the immersive start mod launches you on a suicide flight to a surface of your choosing to kick things off.

>>58610
>SPACE ENGINEERS

I picked that up on sale 6 months or so back, and even loading a save of a 1 planet universe took (no hyperbole) 25 fucking minutes, and I barely got 40fps in space and around 20-30fps planetside.

My rig's not top of the line, but if a 4ghz quad core i7 and a substantially overclocked 970 performs like that, your game is programmed and optimized like absolute shit.

>>58517

To be fair, that only seems ridiculous or noteworthy if you're looking at it like a mechanical engineer, which you shouldn't be doing.

From a software engineering standpoint, simply switching around two lines of code or misplacing a number can cause something simple like an object rotating instead of spinning.

>>58613
Yeah, exactly what I was thinking. Selected the wrong axis for the motion to by applied to. Big fuckin' deal. At least it's modeled and textured all the way around.

>>58612
SE is enormously RAM-dependent, so maybe there's your issue. I'm going to get 16 GB soon to test it out, if it is actually performing at any level.

>>58613
>>58614
>Big fuckin' deal.
Quality control. You are actually obliged to hire people to test whatever the fuck you are making, especially if you are not part-time game modification developer. Really fucking big issue.

>no, I'm not, not, not going to post the video about THAT game

>>58615
>Quality control. You are actually obliged to hire people to test whatever the fuck you are making, especially if you are not part-time game modification developer. Really fucking big issue.

The game is in ALPHA, dingus. Someone merely got the axis on some decorative fan switched around. Big fucking whoop. Programmers, whether self-taught modders doing it in their free time, or professionals, make mistakes like this all the time, and nobody ever freaks out about it.

Well, except with this game. I'm not even a particular fan of Star Citizen and haven't spent a dime on it, but the stretches of logic some critics seem to take to shit on it is really sort of shocking.

>>58618
>The game is in ALPHA
And people already paid hundred million for it.

Actually, let's leave people's business to people, and turn attention towards game itself. I am really surprised it is still alive. I will be surprised even more if it will survive to Beta status, not actually talking about r... r.rr.rr... release date.

I play EVE for 3 years. I'm not particularly successful or enthusiastic about it, and I don't run multiple characters, nor I am very optimistic about the future of it, but my in investment has become quite large. SC has been created, as far as I remember, to replace EVE as a serious business space simulator. It won't. It does not have the capacity, it is missing by design. The game does not yet have an integrity even compared to Space Engineers - there is nothing concrete to expect from actual game other then vagueness.

>but the stretches of logic some critics seem to take to shit on it is really sort of shocking
No, sorry, I shall assure you, criticism is not what I mean to exercise there. It is not my usual type of hatred towards games that can be improved and made better if creators put a bit of effort into this. I want it, simply put, crash into the game industry and burn with the blaze of termite charge right through it, so people would learn something about how a proper digital product should operate.

Although with recent events my general trust into consumer has downgraded a notch.

In the time since Star Citizen development started, Elon Musk has sent 9 supply missions to the ISS and invented a rocket that can land itself on a barge in the ocean.

Multiple other space games have been developed and released in the same period. Elite Dangerous and Evochron Legacy for example.

And yet Star Shittizens still continue to defend Chris Roberts' inability to produce a working video game after five years and over one-hundred million ($100,000,000) dollars, while he continues to sell preorders for microtransactions.

>>58619
>And people already paid hundred million for it.

So what? How is that any different, functionally, than a publisher investing the same amount? Do you think GTAV didn't have bugs during its development and even after launch, just because of its budget?

You seem to have this unrealistic, romanticized idea of what software development is like.

>No, sorry, I shall assure you, criticism is not what I mean to exercise there. It is not my usual type of hatred towards games that can be improved and made better if creators put a bit of effort into this. I want it, simply put, crash into the game industry and burn with the blaze of termite charge right through it, so people would learn something about how a proper digital product should operate.

So you're a fanatic as bad or even worse than the sort of people that think SC is the second coming of Christ. Gotcha, I can safely ignore everything you post, now.

>>58620
>Multiple other space games have been developed and released in the same period. Elite Dangerous and Evochron Legacy for example.

ED has been in development for longer than SC (some indeterminate amount of time before their 2012 KS launch, is what they said) and has a more limited scope and less ambitions, and if you look at Steam reviews, even the ones it does have were debatabley attained. And as someone who loves the Evochron series, they are also nowhere near as ambitious (and also not multiplayer in the same sense or scale as either ED or SC), and Legacy is merely the latest iteration on a game that has been in development for nearly 10 years. The differences between Legacy and Mercenary and the others is iterative, at best. So both are shit comparisons.

A game of this scale being in development for 5 years is not remotely surprising. I've googled around and found that graph people always post in these arguments, showing games of comparable or lesser ambition, and their relative development times compared to Star Citizen.

But I am sure you've seen it already, and like 70d38f, I get the feeling you have some irrational, fanatic hatred for this game that I simply can't empathize with or even understand, even as a relatively neutral party who has no real hype for the game whatsoever and is instead waiting to see how it turns out before I spend any money or form a strong opinion (you know, like a normal person).

I'll post it here anyway in the hopes you don't mislead any equally clueless people into what game development is like, though.

>>58623
>REEEE I AM NOT A FANATIC, YOU ARE A FANATIC
Ok.

Btw, the game is in development since 2011, not 2012, that makes 5 years by now.

>You seem to have this unrealistic, romanticized idea of what software development is like.
Yeah let me show you a couple of examples for that, since I live longer than you I know a bit better what it is.

Infinity Tech Demo - 2006
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCzDKj3hjOE
Infinity Combat Prototype (ICP) - 2006
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3nfVTBcG18
Infinity: The Quest of Earth - 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrcEUO7TC28
Infinity: Battlescape - 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg0j_3wlHuY
The game has been pretty much dead in a period between 2010 and 2015 due to problems of the studio. Somehow revived in new, less ambitious iteration.

SpaceEngine 0.4 - 2009
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxAr3nPliss
SpaceEngine 0.6 - 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbZ5GnPidFw
SpaceEngine 0.97 - 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6sq1O4KF-A
SE 0.972 in Oculus Rift DK1 - 2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smyMRzS9QQM
SpaceEngine 0.980 - 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ve0Bpmx8Fk0
The game (or rather a digital planetarium) is being developed by a single person. It is 100% free.

Limit Theory - 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MumoTz8CKtE
Also a single person project. Seems to be on hiatus for last year or so.

Now, for retrospective, this trailer, probably, altogether, costs more than all of these games, combined (I am not referring to assets, just production). And it uses Orator typeface, which is far too unimpressive. It reeks of bad taste.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJJ9TcGxhNY

>>58623
>Half life development
>1999 - 2004
>was released in 1998
Huh, neat.

  >>58623
>I get the feeling you have some irrational, fanatic hatred for this game that I simply can't empathize with or even understand, even as a relatively neutral party who has no real hype for the game whatsoever and is instead waiting to see how it turns out before I spend any money or form a strong opinion (you know, like a normal person).

In all likelihood 70d38f wanted to be a backer to get LTI, but missed the window.

Would explain the interest in the dev cycle and the bitterness.

As a backer I can say this, I bought into the idea of non-compromised dev cycle and put my dollars into the game to facilitate it. If it turns out great, great! If it turns out poorly, oh well.

Even flying around in 2.5 build I am impressed. The rough in of the game is good and can only get better and more in depth.

If you don't like it for whatever reason, then I refer to my original statement.

>>58626
Obviously it is about HL2.

>>58627
I was never the fan of it and I noted all the inconsistency from the beginning. I prefer old school. Developer presents me the ready and working product, watched and reviewed by many players united in the community. And I decide if it is even worth time to spend, not talking about money. SC worth absolutely fucknothing.

The devs are basically stated from the beginning that it is going to be the game to shame leaders of modern MMORPG, and you, players, are going to bring your ideas to this game - for your own money. And when all the ideas were settled, they went on with the paid content. And when this sill expires, I swear, it is going to be all around again with some ship skins and premium packs and golden subscriptions and whatever else. The game part has become completely irrelevant.

>>58623
Those development times are probably not accurate.

For most of those games the studio wasn't working on the game that time. The chart assumes that right after a game drops they start development on the sequel. Clearly this is not the case with most any studio, especially studios that work on multiple game series.

Take Fallout for instance. After Fallout 3 they didn't automatically start working on Fallout 4. They worked on Skyrim, assisted Obsidian on New Vegas, and Online before and possibly during the development of 4.

And the chart is inaccurate when it comes to Fallout 3 anyway. It says development started in 2002. Van Buren started in 02, the Interplay version of Fallout 3 that was canceled when Interplay went down the tubes. The Bethesda version of Fallout 3 was started in 04 but didn't really ramp up development until 06 when Oblivion was finished.

Valve might have been working on Half Life 2 between 99 and 04 but at the same time were creating a whole new engine and a game delivery service plus they went through multiple iterations of the game. Team Fortress 2 did take forever to launch but like Half Life 2 there were several versions of the game made and discarded. Plus you can't really look towards Valve as a barometer of video game development time.

I think my point is video game development is not a fixed time and some games take longer then others especially when they aren't only working it.

The problem people are having with Star Citizen is the fact its the ONLY game Cloud Imperium is working on. The game has been funded by nearly as much as was spent to produce TOR while taking nearly as long and that game didn't have a promised release date they failed to hit.

Plus people didn't invest their own money into the game, didn't have a personal stake as they do with Star Citizen.

Personally I think people are too worked up about it and I think people should be aware that the game can possibly never be released as some games are but I can understand the anger people feel towards the game.

>>58625
>>REEEE I AM NOT A FANATIC, YOU ARE A FANATIC

You'll notice I'm not the one who openly admitted that their entire opinion is based on an irrational hatred of the game and a desire to see it fail, rather than any objective criticism. You exemplify the definition of a fanatic, I'm not using it as a throwaway insult: it's literally what you are.

And for the record, like I said before, so are the people that are utterly convinced SC will be the second coming of Christ and treat it like a religious experience. But one extreme isn't any better than the other, and for people like me who are simply waiting it out and trying to judge every aspect of it fairly and rationally, fanatic SC haters and fanatic SC worshipers both look fucking stupid. You're both fetishists.

>Btw, the game is in development since 2011, not 2012, that makes 5 years by now.

I'm pretty sure I've only ever said that it's been in development for 5 years.

>Yeah let me show you a couple of examples for that, since I live longer than you I know a bit better what it is.

I'm not even clear on what you're trying to demonstrate. Oh look, a tech demo that never got off the ground, and a video that has a couple mechanics similar to Star Citizen (planetary landing, space exploration) and turns it into the whole game.

You seem to have missed my point entirely: you are out-of-touch with what game development is like because you don't seem to realize that 5 years of development for an ambitious MMO is not a long time.

Also, how young are you that you point to videos from at the very earliest 2006, and claim it shows you've "lived longer". Are you 15? That would explain a lot of your bizarre contrarian SC hatred, I guess.

>>58630
>irrational hatred
>any objective criticism
My hatred is entirely rational and solidly objective.

>and a video that has a couple mechanics similar to Star Citizen
You don't get the point. It is not that they are similar to Star Citizen, it is Star Citizen that is similar to them because it borrowed and commercialized most of these ideas in the form of eye candy.

And even that is not my major concern with SC from the beginning. It is the fact that by borrowing them without passion, or respect, or any idea of underlying meaning, they wasted enormous amount of talent on the development stage. They cropped them, maimed them, flattened them to be compatible with modern, uneducated, forgetful or stupidly rich generation of consumers - and a they liked it.

>at the very earliest 2006
YouTube started in 2005, kid.

>>58631
>My hatred is entirely rational and solidly objective.
>No, sorry, I shall assure you, criticism is not what I mean to exercise there. It is not my usual type of hatred towards games that can be improved and made better if creators put a bit of effort into this. I want it, simply put, crash into the game industry and burn with the blaze of termite charge right through it

Your hatred is fanaticism, and devoid of rationality and objectivity by your own admission.

The fact that you can even produce hatred for some piddly fucking space game is honestly sort of pathetic, really. Get a hobby.

>You don't get the point. It is not that they are similar to Star Citizen, it is Star Citizen that is similar to them because it borrowed and commercialized most of these ideas in the form of eye candy.

1) Infinity and Space Engine weren't the first games to have planetary landings or space exploration.

2) The idea has already been commercialized by literally every game ever, and I don't really see why there's anything wrong with that unless you're a filthy communist and/or don't understand that software development costs money.

3) Infinity was a series of tech demos and Space Engine is literally a game about eye candy. How is that a criticism, anyway?

>And even that is not my major concern with SC from the beginning. It is the fact that by borrowing them without passion

Again, they weren't the first. You have some perverse sense of what "ownership" means. You must be a communist.

> They cropped them, maimed them, flattened them to be compatible with modern, uneducated, forgetful or stupidly rich generation of consumers - and a they liked it.

Do you even understand any of the words that leave your mouth or are you just hoping that by throwing around enough nebulous horseshit that your post might actually be taken as anything except a weird ESL non sequitur.

>YouTube started in 2005, kid.

You might want to try posting sober, because it should be obvious I was referring to the 2006 tech demo. This is honestly embarrassing, replying to you at this point. I think I'm done here, feel free to spew some horseshit in your final reply, because I'm pretty sure nobody here is dumb enough to really buy into any of it.

>>58632
>Your hatred is fanaticism, and devoid of rationality and objectivity by your own admission.
I did not come here to listen your frantic bitching about my opinion, I came here to express my opinion on the game, so fuck off.

>The idea has already been commercialized by literally every game ever
>Infinity was a series of tech demos
You don't seem to understand difference between ideas and technologies so at this point I have no idea what are you talking about. Star Citizen, NMS and others alike are posting millions of sponsored articles, videos, blogs to discuss how beautiful their technologies are, how bright their future is, how you can help them by paying more money (so you can sponsor more of their bullshit advertisement). This process itself is absolutely independent from the game development itself, which is barely more notable than any other title out there, tech demo or not.

>and Space Engine is literally a game about eye candy
Just to clarify - this game is astronomically accurate astronomical simulator, which is polar opposite of "eye candy".

>You must be a communist.
You seem to think it is some bad word, but also have no idea what it means.

After FPS mode delayed indefinitely, Not A Scam's single player campaign has also been delayed indefinitely.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2016/10/10/star-citizens-squadron-42-single-player-campaign-delayed-indefinitely/

At least this is kind of working:
http://empyriongame.com/

http://gadgets.ndtv.com/games/news/no-mans-sky-designer-leaves-hello-games-to-work-on-star-citizen-1626350
>According to the LinkedIn profile of the game’s designer, Gareth Bourn discovered by iDigital Times, he has now moved on to Foundry 42. Bourn is working on Star Citizen — another space exploration title that made headlines for being one of the highest crowdfunded games ever.

Bring me my big popcorn bowl.

>>58787
This is going to be fun!

>>58787
>here at star citizen we hire only the finest in nerd scammers