this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2023
96 points (89.3% liked)

Games

16953 readers
474 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Who are the people who keep donating? Like, maybe around the Kickstarter era around 2010-2014 where all you needed was a popular name to get a huge donation. But after 2017, when everyone realized this game is going nowhere... why is there still support?

Why are people are still buying digital ships and bankrolling them?

Are they in a abusive relationship? Are they okay?

[–] Alk@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I buy ships sometimes. AMA. I have fun with it too :)

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm an OG kickstarter backer and I kinda stopped caring a long time ago so I'm not super up to date on this stuff but, last time I checked it was infinitely more profitable for them to stay in development forever than to eventually release the game, has that ever been addressed ?

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Same I was an OG kickstarter and after seeing the glacial development of the arena prototype I checked out. Came back for the persistent universe, it was so buggy as to be unplayable, checked out again (and sold my "lifetime insurance" too, made several times what I spent on that).

I just don't see this going anywhere as long as Chris Roberts keeps focusing on dumb shit and not the core gameplay. It has become evident that Freelancer being as good as it is was a happy accident.

[–] intothemild@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Freelancer was as good as it was because Microsoft bought the studio, and Roberts was out, they then spent a while cutting it down in scope and trying to fix it.

It's a miracle.

https://gameranx.com/updates/id/70033/article/the-chris-roberts-theory-of-everything/

Good article on it.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 3 points 1 year ago

It took me two hours to read through that thing but it was well worth it. Fascinating article with some great insights into Chris Roberts, and seemingly as relevant now as it was in 2016.

[–] Alk@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I don't know if they've directly addressed this, as it seems like a terrible thing to even acknowledge, PR-wise even though it's true. Though that doesn't really affect my enjoyment of the game in it's current state.

[–] MissGutsy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Honest question I have been wondering:

Why SC out of all the space sim/sandbox games? Is there anything that this game has that no other game provides? Something about the community, a combination of features, gameplay loop or something else?

There are hundreds of games in that genre but many people obviously like SC so much that they are willing to spend larger amounts of money on it. I really wonder what it is exactly or if it's just the general feel that game has. It's not an easy question to answer from an outside perspective, its hard finding anything about SC at all except about its monitisation.

And again: I'm genuinely curious and not judging. People can like whatever game they want and spend as much money as they are willing to part with. I have often searched for an answer to this, but most articles/videos either say "expensive crap" if they don't like it or don't go beyond "it's a space sim" if they do.

[–] Alk@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Thanks for asking a question and not immediately bashing my opinion! It's not a common response I get with this game.

For me, SC as a space sim offers more of the "sim" than any other game. For example, my recent favorite gameplay loop is being a rescue medic. I have a cutlass red, which is red, has ambulance-like lights, and a med bay. I get kitted up with red armor, healing supplies and tools, and lots of extra food and water. Plus a few guns because whatever injured people is likely going to try to get me too.

Once all the shopping is done, I load up my cutlass red and wait for someone to submit a rescue beacon. (they can do this when rendered unconscious with a single key press) Once I get one, I speed over (I have equipped a very inefficient but very fast warp drive) and extract them or heal them on the spot if possible, and clear out any enemies in the mean time.

This is some of the most satisfying and rewarding gameplay I've ever experienced. Because it's not a level someone designed, it's pure emergent gameplay with extremely heavy simulation roots. There is no teleporting in and out of ships. Every door in the ship has a little button I have to press to open it. I have to stay hydrated. The little things add to it. It all comes together to make some of the best content I've ever experienced.

And the people I save are genuinely grateful. It takes time and effort to buy a whole new set of armor and weapons and such, so I'm saving them all that time and money, and while obviously not as impactful as actually saving a life, it makes it much much more gratifying than, say, resurrecting someone in planetside or squad or something.

That's just one type of gameplay. But the principle is the same with other gameplay loops. It's the most in-depth space simulation I can get right now. Sure, some other games are more polished, have better ship combat, run better (okay ALL of them run better), etc. But none of them have everything that SC does, with the level of realism that SC does, with the in-instance ship interiors that SC does.

As far as buying ships goes, honestly I just like big ships. I used to climb on tractors when I was a little kid. They were so much bigger than me and just looking at them filled me with a sense of awe. This game does the same. I have spent quite a bit on it over the years, but only $10 or $30 here and there, to upgrade existing ships to others. You can trade in ships for other ships, melt them down for store credit, use that to get different ships. I've had so many ships just from swapping them around and every time I spend money it's just the price of ordering out, for a lot more enjoyment than I'd get from a pizza. It eventually added up to several hundred dollars and it was personally worth it for me to feel that amazing feeling of exploring what is essentially a mobile skyscraper or a hot rod or an ambulance or a fortress of destruction. You can earn most of these in game as well. But it's easier to get that dopamine hit immediately for the price of an unhealthy meal haha. Now that I have that much money invested, it's still "liquid" in that I can melt down my ships at any time and basically buy any currently purchasable ship immediately with no additional money spent.

Edit: since you mentioned community, the SC community is pretty like-minded. The people I save often go on to be my friends and play with me sometimes. Everyone is very nice. The most toxicity I ever see are people who join the game and shit on it, while insulting everyone else who plays it, then most likely leave and uninstall. These are people who think the game is a scam, maybe they're original kickstart backers who are just mad about the game or even just bought it to ride on the hate train. (being mad after backing the kickstarter is a valid stance, but I'm not going to get into that here. The only invalid stance is believing other people shouldn't enjoy the game.) The people who ACTUALLY play it regularly already know what they're getting into. They have no illusions about what this game is, and because of that they end up being one of the most welcoming communities of any game I've played. Everyone's just here to have fun with cool space ships and each other.

Disclaimer: I agree that SC is a burning pile of spaghetti code that will likely never be finished. I agree that they made promises in the kickstarter that they did not fulfill. I know you can buy thousands of dollars worth of in-game ships for an incomplete game. It will likely never finish. Yet I still play the game. And it's really fun! Come play with me some time :)

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have to stay hydrated

This is actually one of the changes I like least. I love survival games (one of my favourite games ever is Wurm Online/Wurm Unlimited and it's hardcore) and play modded Arma so I know how fun this level of immersion can be, but it just feels awful in SC. Stock up on snacks and water, go to warp to mission, get sucked out of the ship. Ok start the recall timer... get the ship back, load it up again, warp out and back, can't rearm or refuel. Welp junk all my stuff again and relog because nothing but my running costs are persistent (nuking any semblance of immersion). Warp timers clocking 20 minutes? Yep you're playing SC. Guy hotdrops on you while you're trying to have fun and blows your ship up before you can even see him coming? Very immersive, especially because you know he got nothing out of it other than the satisfaction that you didn't get to have fun.

Adding food and health bars while none of this rest of this works right feels like shit.

[–] Alk@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah I can agree that it sucks major ass right now. The idea is cool, but it does get very annoying when re-buying stuff after dealing with bugs. One change that could fix all of this is getting to take out insurance on not just your ship, but your ship and everything in it (not including, like, ore or something. Only stuff you can buy.). So if I ever claim a ship, I could make that specific ship come with a specific set of armor, specific personal guns, ammo, medical supplies, and even food and water.

I do like shopping for stuff. But if I already know what I'm buying, especially if it's the same stuff every time, I'd like my ship to come with it.

On a side note, drinking while in the pilot seat should be automatic, or at least very easy. I get so thirsty just sitting in my seat flying or idling/waiting.

But the idea of having to tend to bodily needs is something I definitely agree with and think is fun for a simulation, at the base level.

Edit: on many of the bigger ships, like the mercury star runner, there should certainly be waste recycling to provide you with water. It has toilets. It's meant to sustain life for a long time. It has a bed and a fridge. There's no reason to not let the ship help keep us hydrated.

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Modern astronauts can drink while in their suits, why is this an issue in Star Citizen? It makes no sense.

[–] Alk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I agree with you in concept, but I think certain suits wouldn't make sense with that functionality. The skin-tight EVA suits with the small helmets, that have just a few minutes of oxygen I feel wouldn't have the room/capability to allow the user to eat/drink hands-free. But there are several suits that are bigger, and designed for extended exploration sessions that have tons of oxygen storage and larger helmets/built-in backpacks that would absolutely have other life support like food/water built-in.

The smaller suits are designed just in case you need to EVA, and many ships have dining areas so you can pop the helmet off and enjoy a meal in comfort.

[–] Garden_Ramsay@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

That's a great observation about you hanging out around tractors as a kid and having that sense of awe. I had a similar thing as a kid with my grandpa working on semis and old cars. I really hope they do pull the game off despite my brain telling me this is all a house of cards. But exploring ships and space is so damn fun, this is the closest game to that. Tried all the X games and Elite and everything in between and SC, broke as it is, still has me holding out hope. At the very least if they never make it to a full release I hope someone else tries something similar. Starfield is fun but not scratching the same itch.

[–] MissGutsy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, thanks for that in-depth answer. It's nice to talk about the actual contets of a game for once, instead of only talking around it like it's usually the case nowadays.

It's very interesting to hear about all this. I actually think there are a lot of games with far worse monetisation (think all the Airplane/Train simulators where you can buy singular vehicles for hundreds of dollars).

I'll probably won't play it tho, I don't have the money, Conputing Power, or time lol

[–] Alk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah time is a big one. It definitely requires time and patience to actually get to the good gameplay sometimes.

[–] Chailles@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I haven't played much of it, but what I can say about why I bought the game: Big space ships with interiors (most space sims really just give you a cockpit view) and the game looked cool. I paid $60 for it years ago and hop in it every now and again. You hear all about the monetization aspect of it and it's not really been a problem for me since it doesn't impact me in any way.

Why are you having fun? You’re not supposed to have fun. Wahh!

[–] thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Have they stuck to a control scheme? I feel like every time I log in I have to relearn how to fly my ship and I get bored and then come back after a big patch and its different again.

[–] Alk@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Last patch I would have said yes but this patch they changed a bunch of things again haha.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 10 points 1 year ago

Sunk cost fallacy at this point.

Paid too much to stop playing and paying. You can buy second hand cars for the price of some of that shit.

[–] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I bought a super base version when they finally released some shit thinking it'd actually come out. That was like 16 maybe? Check in every few years and am always amazed at how little they've got done since the last time. It's obviously vaporware. I hope someone starts a nice class action lawsuit against them. It's fraud at this point.

[–] Garden_Ramsay@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

I do the same thing and have tons of issues with how they're making the game. That being said it's far from vaporware. The experience is pretty jank at the moment but 2 years ago when I played a lot it was stable and you could sink a lot of hours into an actual gameplay experience, which is far from vaporware from my understanding. Theoretically you still can but I'm waiting to play until it's more stable. It's still alpha yeah but when it works it's an actual game, albeit far from expectations and promises.

People should absolutely criticize the development but calling it fraud seems a stretch, they clearly have a product it's just like 6 years away probably from being what they talked about 6 years ago lol. It seems more like mismanagement and development bloat. The insane backers notwithstanding. Even if they dump development now I had some fun times with $45 spent. It's certainly an interesting experience to behold, I just think the hyperbole around the game can be ridiculous. My two cents.

[–] infinitepcg@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Because they want to fly the digital ships?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

This article leaves a lot to be desired imo. Some of the stuff in here you can see is incorrect just from launching into the main menu of the game.

Here is my personal take on Star Citizen as someone who's been following the project from the beginning:

If it's something that interests you, you should wait for a free fly weekend and try it out. The game is far from done but it's fleshed out enough now that you can have fun if it's your thing. If you think it's not worth buying, don't buy it. Then you can come back on the next free weekend to check it out again and see the progress.

Everything else is just noise. Yes the game has raised a lot of money, yes there has probably been mismanagement and development has been slow. Yes there's still a ways to go before feature completeness.

TLDR: Who cares. Go play it if it's your thing and have fun, or don't and just forget about it until they hit 1.0 sometime who knows when.

[–] entropicshart@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

People who paid money expecting the promised timelines instead of useless feature creep, care very much. In fact people cared so much that CIG changed the user agreement to no longer allow refunds.

They took a stupid amount of money from people all while promising timelines that were never kept, and a game that I doubt will ever see completion before bankruptcy.

They need to stop throwing money and precious development time on minuscule features when their alpha can barely run on modern hardware without taking 10min to load and crashing shortly thereafter.

I hope that I am wrong about SC and the game does come out some day, because I will absolutely love the game in stable form; but the last few years have been painting a very grim picture of SC’s future

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 9 points 1 year ago

Fun fact, the user agreement doesn’t mean anything in Australia. Australian’s can get a refund any time they want because legally we cannot sign away our rights.

I got a refund a while back after I discussed this point, and my grievances with their broken promises, delivery failures and increasingly hostile sales tactics with RSIs (at the time) Director of Player Retention, Will Leverett.

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, that's fair enough. I think they should definitely give refunds to folks but that's also the risk you take with backing a project. I've had plenty of disappointment with backing games, I don't consider SC in that category but I can definitely understand people who do.

[–] entropicshart@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Of course, I’ve had my share of starts go tits up; but we are talking about 600m and a company that is still actively trying to sell more.

[–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This article was the same paragraph over and over. “Lot money, lot time, no game, please say date.” I didn’t really learn anything about the situation or controversies.

[–] WrittenWeird@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Welcome to modern "journalism".

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 1 points 1 year ago

Well, I don't think it was written by a "journalist". It was probably written by AI, at least in part...

[–] Kaldo@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

If they give me a refund I will stop caring, until then you don't really get to say 'who cares, forget about it for another decade'. I paid money for a product that still doesn't exist and is more than 8 years overdue, and that's even without getting into the discussion about whether the PU is worth it or not - where is sq42?

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Star Citizen release vs GameStop going to the moon, who will win.

[–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Robert probably thinks he is on the moon, so RSI?

[–] Infinity187@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The grift or grifts as it relates to gaming....DayZ is a close second.

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I had a lot of fun playing DayZ though, lol.

[–] Infinity187@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Same here, put a good 150 hrs with friends. Solo sucks.

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I have no friends so it was always solo, lol. Which would be the same case if I played this "game".

[–] mrbubblesort@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If there's only 1 lesson you take from this, it's that you should never pre-order, never kickstart. Risk should never be offloaded to the consumer

[–] PM_ME_FEET_PICS@sh.itjust.works 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pillars Of Eternity, Rimworld, FTL, Shovel knight Divinity OS 1 and 2 were all made possible thanks to kickstarter.

Without the success of kickstarter games there would also be a snowball effect. Games like BG3, Outerwilds and Stray would not have been made.

[–] mrbubblesort@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

For every success, there's 100s and more failures, scams, and unfulfilled promises. Developers should seek traditional funding if they're so confident in their idea. If I'm taking a financial risk on a developer, I should get a financial return if it succeeds. "Kickstarting" is a fancy way of saying "lets socialize losses and privatize profits".

[–] Magiccupcake@startrek.website 3 points 1 year ago

I've only crowdfunded a handful of gsmes, mostly vr. Because they can't get traditional funding. Despite this I want to support projects that could be interesting. Without Kickstarter these projects would not exist, rather than switch to traditional funding.

I know there's risk, i know they may never get finished. But its worth the risk in case a true gaming gem comes out.

[–] Nima@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

uh. no? BG3 is my favorite game and it was EA before release.

load more comments
view more: next ›