This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The game Star Citizen... one shot deal or the future?

#31Cowboy082288(Topic Creator)Posted 4/2/2014 2:04:55 PM
kelemvor posted...
Every time a thread about SC comes out, dozens of people immediately chime in wanting it to fail. I'm surprised so many gamers here are brainwashed into believing only huge publishers like EA and Ubisoft have games worth buying.

Chris Roberts is basically a throwback to the 90s when games were made by gamers and not accountants and marketing departments. His reputation and legacy is resting on this game. He's not going to let us down.


I won't say rather I think it will be successful are not. Because, well, I just don't know. A lot goes into making a game of this size successful and even veteran game developers can fail in a new project.

That being said, I do share your sentiment. I really hope the game is successful. Publishers takes a lot of crap but in many ways have been necessary. Without them we would not have gotten games like Total war, Mass Effect, WoW, Oblivion ect. Buuuuuut they undoubtedly stagnate progress sometimes. Endless CoD sequels all the way until we are actually talking about a dog being in the game???

I hope Star Citizen succeeds and creates a new model so that in the future we have the best of both worlds. Still have AAA titles from the publishers but also get the occasional ambitious AAA title from the indie world.

And this game is very ambitious in one regard. Space combat is a big part of it. Most of the publishers view this as a niche genre and would never put this kind of money behind it.
---
PSN/XBL/Steam/iOS - cowboyoni
#32Greendragon854Posted 4/2/2014 2:11:35 PM
I just get excited any time I hear a developer is actually passionate about their project. Games should be made by gamers, being paid by gamers. Not suits, board members, and monetization specialists. Blizzard isn't the same PC gaming champion after Activision tore out their soul. EA's track record speaks for itself. Ubisoft is...meh. Even Steam is kind of being meh lately.

I'm just excited to get an Oculus (or whatever alternative there is if FB screws the rift up) and immerse myself in another universe. Gaming has just gotten boring for me. Hoping this rekindles some sort of spark.
---
"Are you going to buy this time? Or are you still just curious?"
"Well, I supposed you could say I'm Buy-Curious" ~PSN - greeniebeanie
#33g7g7g7g7Posted 4/2/2014 2:49:44 PM
One shot deal? no.

The future? no.

There are going to be huge AAA crowdfunded releases alongside the stream of others. It isn't going to completely erode the current publishing - production model but it introduces more options. It's a big win-win for consumer choice, the problem is with all pre-orders and pre-releases, things can still change mid-production and you might end up being disappointed.

But its about value for money in the end, I would rather put my 20 into the hands of people who want to make a product tailored for people like myself rather than put 20 into the back pockets of an Activision CEO for a copy of Call of Repetitive Corridor Based Action Shooter 45 as well as another 20 for all the maps.
---
"You know what's most annoying about hearing neighbors having sex?,
When it's too quiet*" - Umbongo
#34_LegendaryPunk_Posted 4/2/2014 2:54:49 PM
Aside from simply being contrarian, I don't understand why people would want this game to fail. Proven talent at the helm, (practically) unlimited budget, niche genre and free to develop without a publisher interfering.

And it's not even people saying they dislike the game because of revealed gameplay details. They straight up just don't want it to succeed. I don't see how this game failing could be a good thing for gaming at all.
---
"But though you may find this slightly macabre,
We prefer your extinction to the loss of our job."
#35Cowboy082288(Topic Creator)Posted 4/2/2014 2:59:09 PM
On a different aspect of this. I wonder how publishers fill about this project? Are they even watching it?

I agree that the traditional publisher model will not go away. But if this model works it would mean that competition for them could spring out of nowhere.

Such as Activision says 'we got to beat BF4 this year with CoD', then all of a sudden the situation is more 'ok we got to beat BF4 and um this new game that is also competing with us'.
---
PSN/XBL/Steam/iOS - cowboyoni
#36g7g7g7g7Posted 4/2/2014 3:32:52 PM
Would Activision be able to run a cease and desist against a game titled

"Call of Repetitive Corridor Based Action Shooter 45" I might put up a kickstarter page.
---
"You know what's most annoying about hearing neighbors having sex?,
When it's too quiet*" - Umbongo
#37JKatarnPosted 4/2/2014 4:14:49 PM
Greendragon854 posted...
http://alteredqualia.com/xg/examples/deferred_skin.html


Somebody get that man some Clearasil.
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#38JKatarnPosted 4/2/2014 4:16:52 PM
SinisterSlay posted...
KabtheMentat posted...


Point being that shouldn't have happened if consoles are responsible for "holding gaming back." It's not like they were considering a 360 version and decided against it at the last minute.

I dunno, the whole consoles holding gaming back argument just bugs me. It's a super lazy argument.


Where you start to see the hold back is like.
Skyrim, only 6 NPC's on screen at a time and tediously crafted to insure there is never more.

If they had unlimited memory, the designers could have focused on making the skyrim world feel alive with people.


My experience with 25 man WoW raids (not a particularly amazing game on a technical level) tells me that they still likely would keep the onscreen character limit fairly low.
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#39JKatarnPosted 4/2/2014 4:19:19 PM
Greendragon854 posted...
Look at Dark Souls II. The gameplay is intact, but lighting effects that even a low end gaming pc could handle easily was taken out of the PS3 and 360 versions (and probably now the PC version) Consoles are simply underpowered. You can't say they aren't holding back gaming with an example of a badly optimized PC game. It's a matter of power. You can still make a FUN 8 bit game. N64 and PS1 games are still fun, and you can still come up with a game no one else has. But the longer you make games for the same set of hardware, the quicker you stagnate. You've got to move forward, and consoles don't let you do that.


Even if consoles are taken out of the picture (unlikely as they generate the lion's share of the profit for publishers due to a much larger installed base), any publisher/dev that wants to make money has to account for the fact that most PC gamers are using entry level/mid-end machines, why would they cater exclusively to the 2-4% of the market with "uber l33t" rigs and abandon the rest of the market?
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#40JKatarnPosted 4/2/2014 4:22:08 PM
_LegendaryPunk_ posted...
Aside from simply being contrarian, I don't understand why people would want this game to fail. Proven talent at the helm, (practically) unlimited budget, niche genre and free to develop without a publisher interfering.

And it's not even people saying they dislike the game because of revealed gameplay details. They straight up just don't want it to succeed. I don't see how this game failing could be a good thing for gaming at all.


Because dude, those AAA marketing departments NEED those millions of dollars, how dare someone spend the money on actual GAMEPLAY.
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES