Inside Star Citizen returns with details about building in-game brands and a sprint report

    
14
Inside Star Citizen returns with details about building in-game brands and a sprint report

After another break, Star Citizen is back on its weekly video series rollout as Inside Star Citizen makes its full return.

In this episode, players are first shown how CIG considers the creation of the various brands and manufacturers in the game, whether its ship builders like Origin or ARGO or weapons manufacturers,. The video goes into several considered details like visual language that identifies ships, weapons, and even groups or factions within the game and whether certain weapons manufacturers are known for making weapons that are fast-firing, good at long range, or have greater power per shot.

The video then closes out with a sprint report that takes a look at some logo design concepts for four new in-game brands, the addition of drop-down and scrollable menus to the Building Blocks UI engine as well as continued work on element resizing features, more work on gas clouds for the PU, yet another look at the cargo deck section of space stations, and a look at upcoming ship features like an expanded cargo bay for the Constellation Taurus and auto-docking for the Merlin and Archimedes into the Constellation’s docking port.

source: YouTube

No posts to display

14
LEAVE A COMMENT

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
styopa

I feel like this will almost inevitably result in identities like Nike or Coca Cola ending up in game, leveraged by the power of their marketing dollars and SC’s apparently insatiable appetite for funding.

Reader
Armsman

And you’d be 100% wrong. There have been no real world brands and no real world brand marketing of any type inside Star Citizen’s universe, nor are there any plans to have any. What they do have is an attempt to make it seem like thier are 30th century universe is alive.

And given that they have three locations worldwide where development of the game is continuing and 500+ developers working on the game, as well as running their alpha servers 24/7; that takes money as no one works for free, and Amazon doesn’t give their cloud server service away for free either.

Regardless of the current’s playable state of Star Citizens alpha, CIG is and has been running their game servers since 2014.

And yes all this takes money, so yeah they need a cash flow to continue developing their game.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
Totes McGoats

I agree game development takes money. I think most people get annoyed that rather than fleecing large investors that should know better, CIG lies about features and content release to fleece individuals foolish enough to trust Chris Roberts.

Reader
Rhime

Could you elaborate on what features and content releases CIG has lied about?

Reader
ichi sakari

Chris has misled the backers on the timeline repeatedly, my guess is that he feels a need to keep the hype level high to fund the project, and it has cost him some credibility in my eyes

most of the backers that I know aren’t fools tho, you probably think they are because they had hope for something different than the crap most corporate devs shovel at us (and having hope can seem pretty foolish) but my experience is that most in the community are eyes wide open about the deal

Squadron 42 - Star Citizen Screenshot 2020.07.13 - 20.08.47.50.png
Reader
Tee Parsley

Not wide enough!

Realistically, I don’t know how the lion’s share of the supporters feel, but I just read through a four year old thread filled with fervent anticipation for game releases the next year. Oh well.

Actually like the idea of an ingame corporate design aesthetic. Clever.
It’s a nice touch. But not one that moves the game forward.

Reader
Joe Blobers

Quote: “but not one that moves the game forward.”

Sure let’s pretend nothing have been done in the 4 last years.

Mining does not exist, planet tech V4 either, OCS tripling fps, assets available with in game credits either and now 3.10 with a much evolved flight model than ever to pick one among many.

2 ambitious Triple-A from scratch do take time. This sentence was true in 2016 and will be true in 2021… In the meantime nothing stop you to play something else.

Reader
Nosy Gamer

Don’t you mean the last 8 years? Chris Roberts started the Kickstarter in the summer of 2012. And even back then, his pitch made it seem as if the game had been in development before that.

In Roberts’ original pitch in 2012, it was for 1 game, not two. Heck, in the original Kickstarter pitch, the game was supposed to launch by the end of 2014. I guess I should add that the CIG has already announced that the 100 systems at launch stretch goal will not me met.

Reader
Tee Parsley

Straw man is not a fetching look on you.

Ingame corporate design does not move the game development forward. It’s a cool concept. It keeps the artists busy.

Four years ago, SC fans were talking about the release of SQ42 and the beta for SC proper….in 2017. Guess what. You’re still talking about the same thing, but for 2021. Two guesses what you’ll be saying in 2021….

Reader
Joe Blobers

Quote: “Four years ago, SC fans were talking about”

Talking as never make any project go forward. There is a reason why publishers do only copy/paste of their previous games despite Billion of revenues per year and why this SC alpha have more unique features packed in than any released single triple-A.
You want to play a date, go buy one of the thousands games released available on Steam.
By end of 2021 SC will have receive 6 more patch and CIG will have tackle at least phase zero of mandatory techs for new gameplay: icache, server meshing, physical persistence and physical grid.

Those caring about this project will have play a few more 10’s hours to help bring it to high standard… all for 45$… You can buy for more the next COD or BF. Not Anthem because EA have to rework it from scratch… That’s what happen when you spend 3 times more cash on advertising than on game development and have to release it on a precise date because Finance department told them when a game is ready :)

Reader
styopa

A touch…defensive…are we?

“Will result” its FUTURE tense, so in the first place you can think I WILL BE wrong, but you cannot say with certainty that I AM wrong, unless Chris Roberts is now selling time machines.
Or, promising to sell them to backers willing to pay a low low price if they invest now!

In fact, I was specifically talking about when inevitably the whales get sick of paying for nothing, and the burn rate has destroyed the crowdfunding nut, and Chris is stuck with IOUs promising copies of the game to thousands of backers who won’t be paying him another dime (he already spent than that money).

You think it’s expensive to run servers now? Imagine when they actually are hosting a game. You know, the one that had “been in the works for years” in 2012, and was promised by 2017, no, 2018, no, 2019…when is it, again?

Reader
Joe Blobers

Players have their eyes wide open. This is why they do join by ten thousands after free weeks over year: they do see what the alpha is in terms of content and understand more is coming not less… compared to publishers delivering remaster of past old games.

Whales were and are still a fraction of the +1.2 millions individual account. More are joining every day despite being in Alpha with less content than a full polished game would deliver.

But thanks for bringing this point on table as chart do prove 2020 is the best pledging year in history, crushing 2019 which was supposed to be the worst year as per refundian… but turned to be better than 2018 :)

Not only that. You clearly missed the all project finance model. SQ42 is not a on shoot. There are 3 episodes not even counting about opportunities offered by SC lord to play Aliens instead of human hence more episodes.

Star Citizen is an MMO with micro-transactions starting to be available (not talking about ship pledges). It is stunning to see that free MMO’s (SC is B2P) do keep delivering contents over years… simply because micro-transactions have proved to be more beneficial to a company than selling a copy of game.

CIG do both…. Read my words :”collapse 90 days top for sure!” :)

Reader
Tee Parsley

Again, marketing prowess is not development skill.

You’ll be saying the same thing next year, the year after, etc…

Just like folks were in 2015, 2016, 2017, etc…

Reader
Joe Blobers

There is no marketing prowess. CIG get support not because they invented some new marketing strategy. None of what they do is new. Even pledges at thousands $ are part of most crowdfunded project.
The SAINT (collector’s edition) of Kingdom Come deliverance was 8000$…

What is new for gamer is veteran with released portfolio of space games proven good to memorable offering to do it again with modern tools, to break the curse of buying at premium copy/paste of the same games during another two decades like publishers did and keep doing.

The true prowess is a company transparent enough to let everyone play/test an alpha several weeks per year, getting support because of it with ten thousands new backers joining at each patch.

n 2015, 2016, 2017 players were able to play any games they wanted. Backers were able to play any games they wanted, plus support with less than a triple-A cost over years a project providing what no others publishers will ever care to release… when ready.