Yes, we can say it's still alive!
Yes, we can say it's still alive!
We can officially confirm that the star citizen project has become a scam, and this game is essentially as outdated as that common possum we see on our commute to work. If it ever gets launched, I’m not confident it would generate any profit. Most people who wanted the game have already purchased it, but now they’re left with a partially functional experience that was never meant to be. The fact that the game has been released multiple times over several years only adds to its disrepair, especially since its original launch date in 2012 has been repeatedly altered. With terms of service changes so frequent and customers forced to accept them, it’s clear the developers can’t guarantee access for anyone who paid for it four years ago. Perhaps I’m just venting here, but I’ll say this: Star Citizen is likely one of the most successful yet disastrous titles in gaming history.
It's still under construction and another major update is expected near Christmas. I'm not sure if your comments are funny, but games often face delays, though most developers tend to be more transparent about their progress than they usually are. Four years of work feels like a short time compared to the resources available at the moment.
Development began in 2011 with a demo presentation of the game they intended to build. My intention isn’t to provoke, but to ask if others share my concerns about a project that may have been funded over time. I label it a scam since Chris Roberts has essentially defrauded anyone who contributed financially. He promised a future product at a certain price, then altered it and the terms after he secured the funds, refusing refunds for those who didn’t accept the revised conditions.
You're only loosely involved since you received a free account after buying an AMD GPU, but it's taking a long time mainly because of changing priorities. It would be better if they followed the initial plan and launched the product before considering expansions.
the main issue is that the boss (insert name here) demands more flashy tech demos than a solid game, he also has high expectations and plans to launch an AAA title on an indie budget. most of his money is already spent, and the project is only about 30% complete. some team members and developers are falling behind on pay, and the atmosphere in the group is growing more negative. this comes from an inside report a few months ago (I have to search hard to find the details) from someone who left as things began to fall apart. I really hope the game makes progress, but it’s the giant 3 at this point.
Smoke and mirrors—was it a test or a paid video? Early access titles that demand payment for beta versions tend to struggle. Rust & Ark face many criticisms. They’ve already spent your money, so why the push? Look at these games versus BF1’s free beta; BF1 is set for strong sales over the next couple of years, while Star Citizen risks damaging its reputation by charging for an unstable release.
I wasn’t part of the initial phase so my understanding might be incomplete on what was promised. What was offered to early supporters has now grown into something much larger and more ambitious, which I believe contributes significantly to the issue. If they had stuck to the original vision, they could have relied on that launch and planned further updates. Consider another recent online gaming title as a comparison. I supported Elite: Dangerous during its Kickstarter campaign. I recognized it was a high-risk investment and didn’t just buy in for the basic version but for the extensive expansion possibilities. For a game that didn’t exist and wasn’t available for over a year, and I wouldn’t care whether I enjoyed it, using expansions would have been pointless. It did happen eventually, though late—this isn’t surprising. It wasn’t flawless at launch, nor is it now. But they delivered a product and sold it to a wider audience beyond the original backers. Since then, they’ve added more features and continue planning further expansions. Would Star Citizen have followed a similar release strategy? I’m supporting two other Kickstarter projects, both of which seem unlikely to launch soon and are already behind schedule. One is clearly a waste of time, while the other may eventually succeed but is known for slow progress on its promises...
I purchased Elite Dangerous about a year ago, including the Horizons Season, for a significant amount of money. In my view, it was a worthwhile investment, and I'm excited to see its development moving forward. I also think it could have been an even stronger choice for Star Citizen.
The project wasn't meant to debut in 2012? That's what you're asking about? They originally planned for a release by the end of 2016, but that didn't happen because the game is going to be much larger than anyone anticipated. Development takes a long time, longer than it seems, especially with the scope for SC. A lot has been done behind the scenes. The engine is so different now that they've changed its name. We really don't know much about Squadron 42 (the singleplayer) except for the actors, but it's expected to be available by 2017 at the very least. No later than 2018.