Yes, Derek Smart was correct.
Yes, Derek Smart was correct.
Derek Smart's perspective seems valid. The game appears to align with what many people expect. I only came across him recently, but his content is quite extensive.
Additionally, it's impossible to completely assess a game based solely on what a small group says. You can't know for sure if a game will be enjoyable just by looking at what the creators intended to share.
I actually put money into this twice and received two refunds because it wasn’t ready and was very problematic. I was hoping for a 3.0 delivery but there’s still nothing.
I've been checking a few streams of the game and it seems fine at first, but since it's only in Alpha, it's tough to judge from this early. Saying it's good is just like what they did when they first announced No Mans Sky. You can't really know if a game will turn out great until beta versions appear a month or two before the official release. From what he's written so far, it seems like they're making a huge mistake and this game might never get released properly. I think it could end up like another DayZ title stuck in Alpha forever, until they can't afford to support it anymore and everyone gets in trouble. (I doubt any of that will actually happen, but hey, 'Merica Land of the Trump)
It appears the game looks good, though from what I've seen it wasn't done well. I invested around 350 hours in Elite, and while it was engaging at times, it felt repetitive. It offered a solid experience with reasonable performance compared to GTX 980, thanks to better frame rates. The netcode problems seem unlikely to get fixed soon.
I’m hoping it works well eventually, but based on what I’ve seen so far, it doesn’t seem like a good idea to try it right now. With my PC, I doubt I’d reach 15 frames per second.
Lately I've invested a lot of time climbing to the fifth spot on the leaderboards. It's not worth it.
Certainly! Here’s a rephrased version of your text:
Well, could you clarify a bit more? Was his initial statement accurate regarding what he claimed during his first disagreement with Chris Roberts? He suggested Star Citizen would only ever be the hangar module and some attractive videos? Probably not. I think he wasn’t entirely correct about that. Was he correct when he described 2.0 as just a tech demo video, implying we’d be limited to dogfighting in arena commander? That seems to have been an overstatement. Two years ago, he claimed they were out of money and had “good authority” to file for bankruptcy soon—maybe he was off the mark slightly there too. Was he correct about procedurally generated planets not being a realistic idea and that they couldn’t realistically achieve such a scale? No, I don’t think so. And regarding his comments on keeping things secret between Chris Roberts and Sandi Gardiner to avoid controversy? He was definitely right! That was a solid point. It really got me thinking. Overall, Star Citizen is facing significant development challenges. It’s an ambitious project that has had to adjust its scope multiple times since the original funding target. Whether they can keep up is uncertain, but it’s still worth considering. Just remember not to focus too much on Derek Smart—he seems to have mental health issues and has been overly critical of his own game compared to Star Citizen. His obsession with tracking the project instead of focusing on his own work was frustrating. It’s a tough situation. I don’t want to be overly critical, but I do feel sympathy for him. Anyway, OP, you mentioned you’ve played the Star Citizen alpha. That gives me an idea of what it offers—though it’s still in early access. ;-p DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT STAR CITIZEN FOOTAGE!!! JUST IN CASE ANYONE MISSED THE BIG POINT.