SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

Threadfin · 05-29-19, 08:52 AM

I think expectations are fine. They usually are a function of promises made. The developers give a an overview of their project, outlining features, timelines and so on.

That's normal. What is not normal in the case of Star Citizen is that virtually none of that has been met. Above, a roadmap was posted. Have CIG met any of their roadmaps on time? It seems a reach to use these roadmaps as a measure of progress when until now they've been virtually meaningless.

What should have happened in my opinion.... As the money poured in and scope creep and ever-ambitious plans sprouted up the devs should have (and had an obligation as far as I am concerned) still delivered the original promises. If they wanted to expand on the scope of the project that's fine, once the original promises were met, and backers expectations satisfied, then the time is right for adding to it.

But that's not what CIG has done. They have essentially used this expanded scope as the reason that the game is far behind schedule. They are saying that since the goalposts have moved, and the project is now far more impressive, that of course we haven't delivered. Look at all we have to do!

Consider Elite Dangerous. They delivered a core in line with original promises. After that they expanded on it. The kickstarter began in November of 2012 and the game was released in December of 2014. In the five years since then, Elite has continued to expand, rolling out regular updates. They didn't opt to just develop it for seven years until all of it was ready. Star Citizen should have done exactly this. Get all core mechanics and one star system done, fully playable, and release it to the many folks who have paid for it. At the very least, Squadron 42 should have been out the door years ago. The fact they can say it's now scheduled for beta in 2020 is a joke. And then supporters throw out roadmaps and say look, all's well. But it's not.

CIG is quick to say that supporters 'voted' for this revised plan, to allow CIG unprecedented latitude to take their own sweet time. But that's disingenuous at best. From what I can tell, the poll they ran represented only 7% of backers, and of those, only 55% voted for it. Hardly a mandate by the masses.

Here's a quote from CIG from the poll

"the more funds we can raise in the pre-launch phase, the more we can invest in additional content (more ships, characters etc.) and perhaps more importantly we can apply greater number of resources to the various tasks to ensure we deliver the full functionality sooner rather than later."

Nowhere was it explicitly stated that backers were voting for a 10-year dev cycle. Instead, they believed they were voting for increased scope, and the belief was that it would come from hiring additional staff to add this content but within the original timeframe.

And another

"This brings me to the topic of stretch goals. When we started the Star Citizen campaign, the purpose of the stretch goals was to make things we had imagined but didn’t think we could afford possible: adding capital ship systems, studying procedural generation, hiring additional artists to build more ships at once and the like. The additional funding continues to expand the scope of the game and make what we’re doing possible… but it’s becoming more and more difficult to quantify that with more stretch goals (and to explain that to the rest of the world, which likes to focus only on how much money we’ve made.)
Should we continue to offer stretch goals?"

Are you kidding me? And even if that's true, why couldn't it have been done with expansions of the core release?

GIG and Roberts have essentially promised you the greatest pizza ever made. Eager to experience this, you hand over your money and are given a tomato.

But what's this? This isn't a pizza.

Oh, but you see, one day it will be. Epic takes time, don't you know

7 years later you (and millions of others) are holding a rotten tomato.

05-29-19, 08:52 AM	#235
Threadfin Ace of the Deep Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 1,079 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	I think expectations are fine. They usually are a function of promises made. The developers give a an overview of their project, outlining features, timelines and so on. That's normal. What is not normal in the case of Star Citizen is that virtually none of that has been met. Above, a roadmap was posted. Have CIG met any of their roadmaps on time? It seems a reach to use these roadmaps as a measure of progress when until now they've been virtually meaningless. What should have happened in my opinion.... As the money poured in and scope creep and ever-ambitious plans sprouted up the devs should have (and had an obligation as far as I am concerned) still delivered the original promises. If they wanted to expand on the scope of the project that's fine, once the original promises were met, and backers expectations satisfied, then the time is right for adding to it. But that's not what CIG has done. They have essentially used this expanded scope as the reason that the game is far behind schedule. They are saying that since the goalposts have moved, and the project is now far more impressive, that of course we haven't delivered. Look at all we have to do! Consider Elite Dangerous. They delivered a core in line with original promises. After that they expanded on it. The kickstarter began in November of 2012 and the game was released in December of 2014. In the five years since then, Elite has continued to expand, rolling out regular updates. They didn't opt to just develop it for seven years until all of it was ready. Star Citizen should have done exactly this. Get all core mechanics and one star system done, fully playable, and release it to the many folks who have paid for it. At the very least, Squadron 42 should have been out the door years ago. The fact they can say it's now scheduled for beta in 2020 is a joke. And then supporters throw out roadmaps and say look, all's well. But it's not. CIG is quick to say that supporters 'voted' for this revised plan, to allow CIG unprecedented latitude to take their own sweet time. But that's disingenuous at best. From what I can tell, the poll they ran represented only 7% of backers, and of those, only 55% voted for it. Hardly a mandate by the masses. Here's a quote from CIG from the poll "the more funds we can raise in the pre-launch phase, the more we can invest in additional content (more ships, characters etc.) and perhaps more importantly we can apply greater number of resources to the various tasks to ensure we deliver the full functionality sooner rather than later." Nowhere was it explicitly stated that backers were voting for a 10-year dev cycle. Instead, they believed they were voting for increased scope, and the belief was that it would come from hiring additional staff to add this content but within the original timeframe. And another "This brings me to the topic of stretch goals. When we started the Star Citizen campaign, the purpose of the stretch goals was to make things we had imagined but didn’t think we could afford possible: adding capital ship systems, studying procedural generation, hiring additional artists to build more ships at once and the like. The additional funding continues to expand the scope of the game and make what we’re doing possible… but it’s becoming more and more difficult to quantify that with more stretch goals (and to explain that to the rest of the world, which likes to focus only on how much money we’ve made.) Should we continue to offer stretch goals?" Are you kidding me? And even if that's true, why couldn't it have been done with expansions of the core release? GIG and Roberts have essentially promised you the greatest pizza ever made. Eager to experience this, you hand over your money and are given a tomato. But what's this? This isn't a pizza. Oh, but you see, one day it will be. Epic takes time, don't you know 7 years later you (and millions of others) are holding a rotten tomato. __________________ What? Behind the rabbit?