>Bunch of useless 'immersion' gimmicks like walking around in your ship for no reason but to look at shit. Will have no practical application for the next 2 years most likely.
>Beds
>Dumb and unnecessary animations all over the place
>But no TrackIR support in a game about flight after 3 years.
Buyers remorse thread?
Why would anyone waste money on TrackIR when VR is the way of the future?
>>319598821
TrackIR is pretty cheap, and VR is a pipe dream until 2017.
>>319598821
>looks better
>can see objects that are 10+ft away instead of them being a blurry mess
>no motion sickness
>cheaper
>no hyper inflation of the neck muscles after 30mins of playing
>>319596986
>crytek engine
dropped
it looks pretty but it always runs like shit
>>319600917
>Can't even get the ship off the launch pad 90% of the time because of CTD
>The process of getting to your ship is a laggy mess.
Just think. There are people that literally spent over 10k on this. I'm salty over my 45 bucks back when it was on kikestarter. I can't imagine how they feel.
>>319600917
wait does it really use crytek?
fuck....I'll probably never get this game then. They'll never fix the lag and overall technical problems that engine will bring
>>319601436
>They expect it to be a VR experience.
>Can't even run on a single monitor at a decent framerate
What were they thinking?
It had TrackIR support in the Dogfight module. The helmet got in the way, but it supported it.
>>319601639
By the time it comes out PCs will be able to run it decently. That's seriously their reasoning.
>>319601935
>It had TrackIR support in the Dogfight module. The helmet got in the way, but it supported it.
Unofficial workaround by the users.
>By the time it comes out PCs will be able to run it decently. That's seriously their reasoning
If that's their logic that's pretty retarded. 300 for a Rift/Vive and then 500-600 bare minimum for some top of the line card that can actually run cryengine shit at 60fps in HD and 3D on two monitors? Fucking please.
>>319602207
In a couple years it won't need a 600 dollar card.
Just play Elite Dangerous
>>319602474
Considering that the kind of card you'd need to have a decent chance at that is already near a thousand dollars right now, 600 is being pretty fucking generous for one year of progress.
>>319596986
I have no idea why they want to do this too. Is this shit going to have like The Sims module where you have to sleep and shit? Mite be cool but it probably won't happen.
>>319602539
>that shit is nasty but this shit is way better
>>319602634
At least the turd was pinched off. With Star Citizen it's just hanging there with the promise of being something more than it really is
>>319596986
>Recently remembered I backed this shit years ago
>Apparently my computer can still run it
>Launch the game
>Walk in hangar
>Game stutter every 5 seconds when I move, even more frequently when I run because it only loads the texture I'm close to
>Enter a ship
>5 seconds long animation where the game takes controls off me
>Go to cockpit, this time 10 seconds long animation because cool trick with my helmet
>Finally launch the free roam thing
>Awkward controls that feels unnecessarily complicated
>Visually aggressive UI, some laser boomerangs obstructing half of my screen are showing up when I lock on something
This needs 5 years in development and actual designers behind it. Some design decisions are so retarded it's astonishing anyone competent can allow that.
>>319603441
And to make it worse, they have an army of yes-men sucking their nuts no matter what retarded decision they make and it's starting to show. How being able to walk in your ship took priority over being able to actually use freelook with trackir, a system so simple that even bullshit like HAWX uses it, is fucking astounding. Who the fuck wants to play a game DEDICATED to flight where you can only look directly in front of you at all times unless you drop your flight controls in order to waggle your mouse around?
You can tell this game isn't made for actual flight/space enthusiast. That shit is like not having HOTAS support because 'i-it's an alpha!'
>>319604097
we get it OP they didn't include your expensive shitty toy. Get over it faggot.
>>319603131
What an oddly appropriate analogy
>I-i never liked space games anyway!
>>319596986
Walking around in your ship is cozy and comfy, anon.
>>319601139
>people have spent over $10k on virtual spaceships
I don't know how the people of scam citizen can sleep with themselves. If I knew people had put that much trust in me and I was failing them as spectacularly as they are now I'd feel absolutely awful. I'd be working my ass off to make sure these people got their money's worth, but it seems like the current team is content to just sit on their asses and waste time.
>>319604472
>Expensive
TrackIR's are cheap as fuck, and you can make your own with a webcam for like 15 bucks. Fuck off and play Ace combat.
>>319604939
Know what is cozier? Being able to see what I'm doing while flying.
>millionaire guy who got kicked out of the industry for being incompetent makes a horrible game that only looks cool
>everyone is surprised
I'll be here with my sub sims doing trigonometry to sink a warship for Hitler.
>>Bunch of useless 'immersion' gimmicks like walking around in your ship for no reason but to look at shit.
isn't this game an FPS as well? you can go on foot and board enemy ships to kill people inside
>>319606659
As if those "" features"" will be added before the project went down the drain.
>>319601436
I think they hired a bunch of Crytek employees so that they could customize the engine for Star Citizen (like hell CE was intended for a Space game) so we'll see.
>>319596986
Yeah. I feel the same way. There seems to be no real focus in the game. The core of the game needs to be the actual flying and combat and then the economy. None of the core is actually good. If that's still as shitty as it was when Arena Commander was out, then I won't bother downloading this PTU or whatever.
>>319596986
>Bunch of useless 'immersion' gimmicks like walking around in your ship for no reason
Considering boarding is going to be a thing I don't know why you would consider that to be for no reason. Can't hijack a ship if you can't get out of the seat.
>>319605069
>Being able to see what I'm doing while flying
What are you implying?
Why do you keep making these threads
I can't tell if half of the shit you faggots post is meant to parrot retarded shitposters or if you unironically shoot off your mouth without investigating the game first
>>319596986
What all is playable now? I haven't touched this shit since you could only walk around the hangar.
>>319607920
What's inaccurate about what has been posted?
>>319608151
You wouldn't know, would you?
>>319608443
I literally wouldn't. I'm >>319608063
I legitimately want to know what's going on with this game. I asked because I wanted it from the perspective of someone that plays or keeps up with it.
>>319608063
This doesn't do it justice, but if you haven't been keeping up with it, this should surprise you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf4zCCjBwOA
>>319608443
TrackIr support is the only one that's even debatable. And it IS broken right now even though it has ever worked in the past.
>>319608063
Supposedly this >>319608765 but none of that shit is actually in yet properly. And you crash within 2-3 minutes of loading in anyway.
>>319606659
>>319607743
That shit isn't happening for at least another year. 3 years without TrackIR support is a much bigger deal than some vague, promised feature. How about getting the actual core flight gameplay down first before worrying about all this complex never-been-done-before bullshit? All this fancy helmet flipping and space-walking shit is worthless if the main point of the game, flying, is a pile of shit.
>that feel when you are the only person who has been following the game and likes what they are doing
Is this a scam? Are they taking most of the money and just making the bare minimum they can get away with?
Is it Pay to win? If you can just buy ships with real money, why bother playing if some kid with moms credit card is just gonna have the leetest shit?
I can't get a straight answer for most of the questions I want. Is it a space MMO or not?
>>319609034
>but none of that shit is actually in yet properly. And you crash within 2-3 minutes of loading in anyway.
>what is development
>>319609326
>I can't get a straight answer
well get the fuck off /v/
>>319596986
Star Citizen isn't a game, it's a commercial for a game that will never exist.
>>319609503
>3 years
>Can't even map freelook to trackIR
Honestly I'm surprised they even support flight sticks, though my HOTAS only seems to half work with the game(The throttle controls seemingly do nothing.)
>>319609591
thanks senpai
>>319609326
>Is this a scam?
Well no, if it was a true scam they wouldn't have done any work past the ship concepts.
>Is it Pay to win?
In the current playable modules you could view it that way, but there is nothing to unlock besides credits, which just let you 'rent' other guns and ships. So there is nothing to really 'win' in the first place. The whole point of the stuff you can play now is just try out the ships and have fun, at the end of the day it's for testing purposes.
>Is it a space MMO or not?
No, not yet anyways, they have a lot of work to do before attempting the MMO part.
>>319609098
The combat is really fucking bad though, almost all fights are these uncontrollable drifts where the attacker endlessly loops around the target, or both participants just endlessly line up and strafe, rinse and repeat. Missiles are a joke now too, and gimbals just turn combine this awful crock of shit with Arcade War Thunder controls in space. In the PTU it's even worse.
>Players can fly at 10 x normal speed in cruise mode
>Players can enter cruise mode or jump to new locations with no cooldown, making all combat completely avoidable
>Nothing available to disrupt either of these travel modes
>There are people on the SC forums who think this is a good thing
At least Elite has better combat.
>>319609326
Yes to all of those. It's one of those 'forever an alpha' type games that has been in development for years and doesn't have a lot to show for it but pretty visuals and terrible gameplay. It's also currently P2W as fuck. Backed the game with 45 fucking dollars back when it was still on kickstarter? Have fun with your shitty Aurora against some shill that dropped 300 dollars on some dedicated fighter craft like the Hornet. And that's if you can even get it to run well.
>>319609839
But dont your ships like blow up permanently?
So in a regular MP game my ships can blow up and theyre gone for good?
Eat shit guys Im not doing that.
>>319609839
>well the did SOMETHING so it can't be a scam!
>it was an mmo then wasn't but maybe if we buy more ships it could be!
>muh immersion
>can't even do space fights right
Go fuck your cinematic experience scammers.
>>319609326
>Is this a scam? Are they taking most of the money and just making the bare minimum they can get away with?
No, it's not a scam and they're not doing the bare minimum at all. If there's any potential problem anon it's the polar opposite: that they're trying to do way too much and won't pull it off. But they're steadily producing actual stuff for people to actually try and it looks good at least. So they're clearly putting in effort and cash and aiming for the proverbial stars. Lots of devs do that and end up with dogshit, but failure due to overambition or lack of skill or both isn't scamming.
>Is it Pay to win?
No, duh + No, duh + probably not. This ties into your next question actually:
>Is it a space MMO or not?
They are aiming for 3 parts: a single player classic campaign, a normal LAN multiplayer (or over the net with private servers, same tech), and finally an official persistent universe online, the last of which is sort of an MMO apparently. Obviously for the first two you can do whatever the fuck you want and get anything you want and mod it just like anything else, so p2w doesn't even apply as a concept.
For the last one (if it works) it SOUNDS like it won't either, at least if it's anything like EVE. You get a hull to start and you get insurance, but hulls are worthless without fittings and fittings may well cost more then the hull and they get no insurance. Plus if you suck at flying it you're just going to be a juicy target.
If they pull it off decently and have open PVP it'll probably be fine. If they have some carebear shit or fuck up implementation it could end up more P2W but that still leaves SP and MP so for $30 it might be fine anyway.
>>319610017
Elite has really solid core gameplay. It's just that they have no idea how to make a MMO game so the economy, the prices, and rewards are all screwed up on the later ships. That's why people are so frustrated with it. It had great potential if there weren't stupid people behind it that are against either making it a MMO or allowing modifiable private servers/true singleplayer to fix its issues.
>>319610621
>If they have some carebear shit or fuck up implementation it could end up more P2W
Like the PVP slider where players will be able to select how many actual people they encounter online?
>>319596986
>Buyers remorse thread?
Ha ha! Oh, silly OP. You imply I was stupid enough to give them any money.
Silly, silly OP.
>>319610285
>"scam" = "bad" or "failure"
God damn you underage faggots, your constant genericization of words is one of the most irritating things about modern English. You'll just take anything at all with the slightest negative connotation and turn it from something specific with meaning to "I don't like it". Fuck you. Yes I'm mad.
>>319610881
Fuck off, shill. A scam is a scam is a scam.
>b-but it was just a small scam, so it's not fair to call it a scam!11
LMAO
>>319610647
Elite's bigger problem is that it's too shallow in terms of gameplay which makes what's in the game currently a much worse grind.
>happily enjoying teamspeak with friends
>some guy from another channel comes in and starts shilling star citizen
>'wow you can do anything!'
>ask him if he's played it
>'lol no none of that stuff is out yet'
>starts shilling the ships
>ask him why the fuck you would pay a shit ton of money for a ship in ANY game, and if he realises the amount of nolife grinding that would be required to obtain such ships in game (if RI wants to appease the thousand dollar buyers and make them feel like their purchase was worthwhile)
>'lol me and some friends are gonna buy a ship'
What a fucking moron. I had to talk my friends out of putting money into the game and convinced them to at least wait until the game is fully released.
No wonder they've raised so mucb money when shills are going around 'spreading the dream'
>>319610858
If they actually have something like that and depending on the economy and other effects sure that might fuck things up, depending. I don't pay more then the bare minimum attention to ongoing work and don't use the forums at all so I dunno, although I feel confident saying that at this stage of development (they have basically nothing done in the persistent universe at all) nothing is set in stone there. I'm sure though that there is the typical carebear bitching going on but exactly how much influence that has in the end and how much it matters, eh. It might wreck it, or it might just gimp the ultimate potential but still be fun as basically an arena. Like, it could wreck any sandbox economy, but for people who just treat it as a PVP meeting tool it might not matter because obviously you have to consent to be destroyed to fight anyone else, and if you suck and the PVP is EVE-tier then maybe it'd be fine.
I only put in the bare minimum money though and all I really care about is the SP and normal MP, so if the MMO bit is ass whatever. It'd be a nice bonus if it's awesome and the fags sinking in LOADSAMONAY are probably convincing themselves it'll be the second coming but all I want is some fun with my bros and a decent foundation for future modding and private servers.
>>319610881
the word 'scam' has inherent negative connotations
>>319611449
If you trawl the forums you'll be astonished at how casually some people talk about their pledge amounts, eg picking up a $1200+ package of ships for themselves during the anniversary sale because it's "a great deal".
>>319610017
The combat is only bad if you are fucking bad. Only noobs joust because they don't understand that they can change their throttle or god forbid trust backwards. Also, I'd suggest not judging the game so harshly when it's still being developed, if you continue on this path, only sadness awaits.
>>319610092
>dont your ships blow up permanently
Right now, fuck no, no, no not at all. In the actual game you buy insurance which will protect your base ship model. So if your ship gets destroyed, you will lose all the upgrades and cargo, but you will get the base ship back.
>So in a regular MP game my ships can blow up and theyre gone for good?
Fuck no, not in the arena mode.
>Eat shit guys Im not doing that
Okay champ whatever you would like
>>319610285
>Being this delusional
>>319600378
>pipe dream until 2017
Nigga you should really play some Elite Dangerous with an oculus. Even with the currently low res and "mesh" effect, its still a mindblowing experience.
>>319611191
You being a dumbfuck trisomy 21 who can barely string two syllables together (I note you stuck to nice and easy one syllable words in your entire post) makes you worthless. Games like C&C4 or ME3 weren't "scams" either they were "shit". Star Citizen may well be "shit" but if it's released at all the way they're going it won't be a "scam". When you shit on a game you should be shitting on it for the right reasons. Fuck you and your EBIN MAYMAYSXD!11!
>>319611559
Of course it does, it's talking about a specific inherently scummy if not outright criminal activity, one that happens with significant frequency and often causes a lot of harm to ordinary people. Everyone hates scams and scammers.
But mere failure is not "scamming" it's a core part of innovation and our entire economy. Most startups in fact fail, it's like 80-90% in the tech field. You can't get anything new and have risks without accepting a lot of total failure. It's worth differentiating between genuine scammers and developers who are just shit, incompetent, focus on the wrong things, try to do stuff far beyond their abilities, try to do stuff that's just plain impossible, suffer an accident, suffer an attack (this may tie into "incompetence"), etc. "Scam" has meaning. A genuine scam would let you pierce the corporate veil and go after their personal assets. At the amount of money we're talking here it'd also absolutely get involvement from the Feds. Using it for whatever because memes is fucking stupid.
>>319611746
>I'd suggest not judging the game so harshly when it's still being developed
ITS A BETA!!
https://youtube.com/watch?v=va5A_fx3mb4
>>319611967
ED sucks though.
>>319611531
I've been following the project since it's inception and I trawl the forums regularly as I'm in the closed PTU test (pre-release patch testing), and the PVP slider is something that usually has a majority of negative responses. Private servers would be the fix for people who just want a PVE experience, and singleplayer would exist for those who don't want to encounter anyone at all. That was at least a summary of the popular opinions the last time I saw it brought up.
>>319611746
>The combat is only bad if you are fucking bad. Only noobs joust because they don't understand that they can change their throttle or god forbid trust backwards. Also, I'd suggest not judging the game so harshly when it's still being developed, if you continue on this path, only sadness awaits.
Christ, you sound like a drone through and through.
I'm in the PTU nignog, and I've played a lot of AC and I havn't enjoyed it. The ships are unresponsive and typically handle quite poorly, like a sliding car, this is even more accurate in 2.0. Add on top of this the get-out-of-combat-free travel options like the cruise mode and quantum leap, and combat is completely avoidable. And don't forget this results in immeasurably long dogfights, like 10+ minutes to fight a base F7C Hornet.
The combat is awful.
>>319612527
Not only that, Elite Dangerous was a lot better while in beta, proving beta state is no excuse for shitty combat and overall instability. Their "It's in development" excuse isn't really valid when other games can get it right while in beta.
>>319596986
>mfw I spent $40 two years ago
>>319611967
Its like you're really in the game! ... while wearing safetygoggles where the sides and 50% of the front has been painted black with windowscreen glued to the parts you can see through.
>>319612512
when people use scam on /v/ they are using it colloquially. they use it as synonymous with deception. if a dev 'aims too high' and has to cut features 'because we were trying too hard', forguve me for thinking that they are poorly managed fucking idiots. bear in mind if star citizen is a failure and doesn't deliver it won't be me chris Roberts has to answer to, it'll be the retards who poured thousands into this fucking shitheap
>>319602574
>he thinks it will release within a year
>>319612527
It's not a beta though it's pre-alpha. Shit I know this is yet another mindless meme but the root of it was in actual full publishers putting out "open betas" that were basically release versions like 1 month before full release and fantards claiming all the problems would get magically fixed in a matter of weeks and of course that never fucking happens.
But if you are genuinely getting to try out a game from the earliest stages of development, well at some point yes, the game is literally an alpha and almost nothing works. Software doesn't just leap fully formed from someone's forehead you realize. You just normally don't see those stages.
Picture very related.
>BUT IT'S AN ALPHA
Well, yes. It was only an alpha. Starcraft turned out to be excellent.Star Citizen probably won't. But you're better of shitting on it for dev bullshit or any pandering to cancer rather then obvious placeholders.
>>319612512
>>319612512
We're kinda muddled between scam and incompetence here, though. Extensive incompetence can be argued as gross negligence, which is punishable. If it can be proven the developers knew, at any point, they'd never be able to deliver, but they kept taking money, then it does become a scam.
>>319613181
I was more referencing the "ITS A BETA, THEY'LL PATCH IT, BUT ITS FUN" image.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=CXJZbPI5nKE
It just werks
>>319613425
At least post something more recent, that's like reposting some SWTOR videos from when it bombed at launch while saying "Look guys, it's still shit!"
>>319613038
>has to answer to
But that's just the thing anon, there are actual real differences between what "has to answer to" means if it was a scam vs not. If he had his company genuinely put all the money into it, properly account for it, handle everything in a reasonable fashion, get out at least part of it in a decent state, and yet still failed to deliver overall, well he'll certainly suffer social consequences, consequences to his future career and so on. And if it amounts to a contract failure and in turn bankruptcy for the LLC then backers could join the line of creditors for whatever they can scrape together (as an aside the REAL problem with crowdsourcing is that it does a very bad job of formally PLANNING for bankruptcy and ensuring that backers are senior creditors and perhaps get assets and such, some failure is inevitable but what happens next is not). But that's it.
Whereas if he'd scammed, or done anything dodgy like mixed personal funding and business and it pierced the corporate veil, then "answer to" could mean prison time. Or at least losing everything he owns, personally.
It's just not the same thing. There are lots of genuine scams on kikestarter and indiegotard too, so it's worth recognizing the difference.
>>319612876
>Their "It's in development" excuse isn't really valid when other games can get it right while in beta.
But SC isn't in beta, and I think for a game to be in development is a reasonable excuse for something incomplete and unpolished.
>>319613962
You're being pedantic. Alpha/Beta doesn't really matter, when you release it broadly to more than your internal testers a certain level of stability and your core gameplay is expected. Otherwise you are just wasting your time trying to broadly support your public testers when you could be improving stability and gameplay instead.
>>319613218
>Extensive incompetence can be argued as gross negligence, which is punishable. If it can be proven the developers knew, at any point, they'd never be able to deliver, but they kept taking money, then it does become a scam.
Sure, but in the real world good fucking luck. "Gross negligence" has actual legal meaning and case law behind it, and unless you've got specific contractual language it's probably not going to apply as much as you might think in a business arena that's entirely unregulated and carries zero safety issues or shit like that. The bar to pierce the corporate veil is not insignificant, even major stupidity is a risk that it's understood and spelled out exists.
Now yes, if lawyers during discovery found an actual cartoon-villain smoking gun email chain or paper trail or whatever amounting to
>"Haha yeah this is impossible isn't it but don't tell them that, now how about the next box of cuban cigars :) :)"
then sure that'd do it. But all joking aside that's atypical. It's usually going to be a LOT muddier and get down to a lot of specifics about what was LEGALLY promised, by whom, to whom, when, actual damages involved, etc. And most likely of all is finding nothing of note except dawning panic or total failure to recognize problems or any one of the endless other failure modes out there, none of which is likely to get you much unless you've got a specific contract provision about it. If they keep clear records, have decent accounting and follow the advice of their finance and legal folks (and it's not hard even for a business orders of magnitude smaller then they are) and generally play things reasonably then even if it all implodes it's doubtful it'll do more then destroy their careers or reputations (and obviously any future revenue potential), for whatever that happens to be worth.
And of course /v/ gets to enjoy laughing at all the backers in that case and mocking everyone involved forever.
>>319614337
>Otherwise you are just wasting your time trying to broadly support your public testers when you could be improving stability and gameplay instead.
How is getting information from a large amount of people with massively varying specifications a useless endeavour? Part of testing is to increase stability by ironing out issues that may be encountered by a small amount of people with a particular hardware setup or OS, or anything along those lines. It also allows the devs to do serverside testing which is important for a game which will have serverside calculations, else nothing core to the game will function properly. In fact there was a pretty major bottleneck with regards to the game's GIM (Global instance manager) that could only have been fixed by external testing.
think, nigga
>>319611449
And because people have invested so much money in this pipe dream, they vehemently defend every decision of RSI, no matter how retarded. RSI is surrounded by thousands of 'yes men', and that's terrible for community feedback.
And I would bet good money at least 60% of the playerbase, minimum, doesn't have a flight stick. Let alone any of the enthusiast gear you need to really enjoy any sort of flight game for more than a week after the 'shine' wears off and you realize that these types of games actually take some level of consistent time investment in to get any serious entertainment out of.
Imagine if typical flight sims had these kinds of people as their main consumer. Imagine how fucking garbage shit like DCS would become trying to pander to people too entitled, lazy, and cheap to play the genre the way it's meant to be played and need to be coddled by having everything 'streamlined'.
>>319614337
Not that anon, but
Alpha/Beta doesn't really matter, when you release it broadly to more than your internal testers a certain level of stability and your core gameplay is expected. Otherwise you are just wasting your time trying to broadly support your public testers when you could be improving stability and gameplay instead.
In this case though they specifically promised certain levels of access to development versions as part of their upfront pitch. They are in fact obligated to do that whether it's "wasting their time" or not. So yes, "alpha" does matter in this case. It likely really is years from "completion" (or whatever turd they are forced to call 1.0), it flat out is missing tons of stuff and is buggy and unstable. This isn't like a company's "open beta" where they are testing for bugs and script errors and shit with a year or less to full commercial release.
I personally think that actually WANTING to dive into a game at this stage, any game, unless you are literally paid for it, is usually kind of silly. But if others want to it doesn't bother me either.
>>319601935
that's dumb
I have an i7 4790k, 16GB RAM and an R9 290x, will this game run well enough for me to have fun?
I got invited to the PTU but I don't have a game license.
>>319615690
My rig should be overkill but I played this before upgrading to that cpu (had an overclocked i7 920) and it ran like garbage.
>>319611449
I think they have some scummy "referrer program" shit anon, where people get rewards if you sign up with their code. That definitely added some unpleasant door-to-door salesman shit to the whole thing.
>>319615068
To take your second point first:
>And I would bet good money at least 60% of the playerbase, minimum, doesn't have a flight stick. Let alone any of the enthusiast gear you need to really enjoy any sort of flight game for more than a week after the 'shine' wears off and you realize that these types of games actually take some level of consistent time investment in to get any serious entertainment out of.
Eh, maybe but it seems likely that's also inversely proportional to investment. Cheapfags like me who only put in $30 or whatever might not have all the gear (well, I do but it's for reasons entirely unrelated to SC) but simultaneously we're not that invested either. Obviously. It seems reasonable to expect that people putting in hundreds let alone thousands would probably also spend a few hundred on a some hardware for it too. Although if they don't at this point that'd be rational, it's still years away.
>RSI is surrounded by thousands of 'yes men', and that's terrible for community feedback.
YES, ABSOLUTELY, that maybe more then anything has always been my big fear with crowdsourcing. A good community can be a boon but an awful one can be utterly destructive, regular people often have a very poor understanding of technical reasoning, overall long term vision and balancing, etc. A key part of any creative's job is being able and knowing when to tell crowds or "focus groups" or whatever to fuck off and ignore them (politely). Obviously the very nature of crowdsourcing though creates powerful, powerful forces pushing to cater to various whims, niche interests and short termism which can be hugely destructive to the final product.
>>319615068
>RSI is surrounded by thousands of 'yes men', and that's terrible for community feedback.
This is true for any game with a forum. You're not wrong, but criticism is helpful and there are many instances where it has resulted in positivity. For example, there was a ship called the Freelancer which had a really fucking poorly designed cockpit which had 0 visibility. There was an outcry for a re-design, but the devs stuck with it. The community continued to outcry about the issue and then it was fixed based on feedback.
>And I would bet good money at least 60% of the playerbase, minimum, doesn't have a flight stick.
One of the oldest polls showed otherwise, that the majority of the playerbase use a joystick for space sims. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/12681-Poll-How-Do-You-Like-To-Fly
>Imagine if typical flight sims had these kinds of people as their main consumer
Every game, every following has a rabid core of unbearable fanboys. SWTOR, GW2, LoL, WoW, EVE, all have an awful core centre of nodding dog morons that worship the dev's every action, but it's obvious when actions are taken based on criticism and the devs will always be looking for helpful critique where applicable.
>>319615976
Yeah, ultimately it comes down to the dev, and how well they can manage the community. If they are strong willed and have a good vision and can stick to that, then they can use the good criticism to make something much better while also harnessing the enthusiasm to pull off stuff that'd be hard otherwise. If they can't say "no" then it'll all go to hell, but that's part of the bet I guess.
>>319611967
I bet you love the new Battlefront too?
>>319615976
I was off by 10%. That's a pretty damn high amount of folks that don't use the absolute most basic amount of equipment to effectively play a flight game. That's a LOT of voices responsible for shit like 3 years and no official trackIR support. Of course it isn't a priority when the majority of your playerbase are 'flavor of the month' types that will play the game for a week or two, then get bored and drop it because they don't give a shit about flight games at the end of the day. These are the kind of people that have flooded the community and are why retarded shit like walking around in your ship and helmet flips are a higher priority than a decent flight model, proper HOTAS support, or proper free-look support, the most basic tenants of a flight game's usability.
>>319616529
But you also ignored the amount of people planning to use HOTAS, and TrackIR is hardly a priority when the game is in it's current state, let alone the barely-playable state it was in 2-3 years ago. It's an afterthought when compared to actually getting the game running, and is forgiveable as a result. Why implement a feature like this that's probably going to break every build that's pushed nearly every day? It's more shit that's not really needed right now that needs fixing every time because people like you don't understand priorities.
>Of course it isn't a priority when the majority of your playerbase are 'flavor of the month' types that will play the game for a week or two, then get bored and drop it because they don't give a shit about flight games at the end of the day.
Star Citizen has been so shallow in content for a long time, though. Can you not forgive someone for not wanting to play a game with not much meat on the bone?
>These are the kind of people that have flooded the community and are why retarded shit like walking around in your ship and helmet flips
But it was always, always promised to be a first person universe, right from the very beginning. Hence why ships has interior designs right from the get-go.And the helmet flip shit was a placeholder animation that never actually made it into a public build.
