Star Citizen has a ‘surprise’ in store for Alpha 2.1

    
162

Hailing frequencies are open, captain, and a new Star Citizen broadcast is coming through, loud and clear. CIG has published its latest episode of Around the Verse, clocking in an hour of news, sneak peeks, and interviews with the dev team.

The big news is that CIG is holding off on publishing Alpha 2.1 for now, as it wants to nail down a couple of remaining issues with the release. However, when it hits, expect the unexpected. Global Head of Production Erin Roberts teased that the studio is holding back something right now from even testers: “I think you will be pleased what we’re going live with for 2.1. Some of you guys who have been playing 2.1 will see some stuff and we may add in a surprise in there as well for people later on next week.”

Star Citizen fans can read the transcript, then hear the commands and proclamations from their space lords and masters after the break.

newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Geoff Dassad
Guest
Geoff Dassad

GoJammit  To be fair, 
FPS – seemingly 99% of AAA games (Wolf 3d – COD / Battlefield)
Stealth – about 10% of games claiming to have it, but still quite a few (Thief series, most big ubisoft games to some degree)
Space combat – WC / Eve / Elite / galazy on fire
Mining in space – EVE / Elite / GoF
Interplanet transportation – WC / Eve / Elite / GoF

Ship component / maintenance – WC / FTL
MMO space combat – Eve / Elite 
Zero-g EVA / Magboots – COD / Deadspace / (Adrift – though still in dev)
Space station exploration / traversing – Deadspace / Alien isolation
Crewed vehicles – UT / Halo
Planetary landings – Elite / WC

And I’m loosing motivation to carry on with the list, but yeah, not much of what is planned is actually new stuff, so don’t know why some people think it’s impossible to do.

GoJammit
Guest
GoJammit

Well if you ask some people around here there is nothing new or innovative about SC. It’s funny because many of those same people years ago were talking about the game could never be done because it’s too much. In reality the only thing, or at the least the main thing that is innovative is the realism, quality, and attention to detail and immersion done on a game trying to do so much.

Geoff Dassad
Guest
Geoff Dassad

GoJammit There is a bit of viewpoint involved. Get the feeling it happened more in the 90s than it does now. New tech comes out and it’s too complicated and/or time consuming to go through the process of including it in the release. Even have an example of it happening with hardware. 

Depending on your point of view, Fallout 4 is possibly a recent example because they missed the PBR memo.  Which brings up the point, does the tech matter? Because Fallout 4 didn’t suffer from it’s lack of PBR.
I think the bigger problem with the industry passing by is if a dev team is trying to do something new (either gameplay or mechanic wise), and then takes such a long time that whatever it was that should have been innovative and set the game apart is common place.

Geoff Dassad
Guest
Geoff Dassad

Darkwalker75 Geoff Dassad Estranged Yeah, should have mentioned when I saw that. Imagine it is useful for people testing different ships to see what works for them.

Estranged
Guest
Estranged

Darkwalker75 Estranged Was thinking more of the FPS module and integration being delayed by at least 6 months.  They were pretty damn positive it would be on time.  

Marketing is manipulation.  Selling numerous ships when your past sales have not be completed is excessive.  They foster a community that is vigilant in defending the game.  The proof is in the pudding.  I’m a backer and have observed the discussions on many websites.  Being a business major and psych major, I see through these things.  It is OK, this is business.  My issue is the hardcore backers refuse to acknowledge this fact.  

Also, the manipulation is in cadence of speech.  Just simply trumpeting these huge amounts of donations.  Having subs to access the staff, without a complete game.  I can’t think of another single avenue of revenue production that hasn’t been approached or implemented that would fit the genre of a BTP game. 

The core backers don’t want to hear that this project, if going by the scope (in comparison to other AAA titles) will be no where near a shippable state within 2 years.  To meet that estimate/promise, some modules will be basic or not included in the retail version. Since they are transparent, we know their progress.  There is no need to ostrich this issue.  

As backer and gamer, I am used to manipulation.  It is part of the process.  This is marketing.  I’m excited by this game, but I’m calling a spade a spade, in my opinion. 

There is no refuting that deadlines have not been met.  There is no refuting the scope of the project has grown larger and the original ship date was not met.  There is no refuting that the sales strategy preys on impulse.  Celebrating the 30K donor is one example.    Don’t fool yourself, there is a marketing strategy to everything they do, this is a well oiled machine.

Estranged
Guest
Estranged

All I see is one universal currency. You can buy it and receive it from referrals. Also, a small amount comes with a ship sale.

captainzor
Guest
captainzor

SoMuchMass  Where exactly did I say players can’t afford something??  That’s called putting words in my mouth to suit your arguments.  You are making one example after another of scenarios where you expect to lose.  I’m simply countering that by saying to avoid the scenario if you feel that would be the case.  I’m not saying you would or would not if you gave it a try.  And I’m not saying that you or anyone else can or cannot engage in that activity for any reason.  I’m pointing out the LOGIC of doing so when it is smart to do so.

And I’m not excusing anything, actually.  I’m not circling around the issue, you just don’t like what I think about it.  You don’t like the simple reasoning I’m applying to your problems but you’re asserting that I mean something by it that I’m not even saying.

But answer this: how would you even know in-game how someone acquired their ship?  You wouldn’t.  I’m not saying don’t dogfight just because someone may have a pledge ship, I’m saying don’t dogfight a bigger dog if you can avoid it and you’re worried you’ll lose.  If you can’t avoid it, then out-fly that person.  You either are skilled/clever enough to avoid a fight you think you’ll lose, or you find out the hard way.  Or you find out their big ship and big guns don’t mean a thing because you’re a faster smaller ship and can outfly them.  Who knows?

This is all fucking mincing words anyway.  CIG has said IDK how many times that the content in Star Citizen is mostly group-based PVE oriented anyway, as that is the type CR loves.  Yet everyone is focusing all this fear and anger over what may happen in the less likely PVP encounters.

SoMuchMass
Guest
SoMuchMass

screecwe SoMuchMass Yeah the racing variant of the Mustang is $70 bucks.  I used racing as an example.  But to be the best dogfighter, to win at dogfighting you would need something like a Super Hornet, Sabre, Vanguard or something else that is $200+.  This argument will never end because you guys have a developer centric definition of what pay-2-win is.

SoMuchMass
Guest
SoMuchMass

captainzor SoMuchMass orkayl So you are saying players can’t do it because they can’t afford it.  You are just using all these excuses to circle around the issue it is amazing.  It is like saying don’t dogfight players with better ships that they bought with real money because you will lose.  Isn’t that the definition of pay-to-win?

captainzor
Guest
captainzor

SoMuchMass captainzor orkayl Why would you race against ships that outclass your own?  That’s a choice you willingly make and you cannot blame others for having different ships that you yourself could also have without spending real money.  So, gain, you’re leaving out the detail that pay-to-win needs to be applicable.  The racing-tailored ships will all be purchasable in game, so all one would have to do in order to not have that disadvantage is WAIT until they can get it in game before they engage in said race.  Again, how can one lose a race if they don’t race in the race?