Star Citizen: 730,000 Space Dollars Funded Already

By Craig Pearson on October 15th, 2012 at 2:00 pm.

Blake's 1-7 all in one.
Every time I refresh the Star Citizen funding webpage, the number keeps hopping up. I hope my F5 button isn’t logging me in and and increasing my pledge. Soon it will be the size of space, and Chris Roberts will have to crowd-fund another universe to contain his bank balance. He might even use Kickstarter for that, but his game is proving that you can do it without them.

The current funding goal is 2 million dollars, with the now obligatory stretch goals. The initial burst of funding has so far filled up just over a third of that, and the weight of people thrusting cash at the monitor crashed the website at least once. So while it’s not quite yet a vindication of his vision, there’s a good chance that in 25 days his game of insterstellar everythingness will be funded.

For a game expected in late 2014, a lot of people are pledging to be part of it. I just dropped $30 on it, because I have an enormous love for open-world space sims, and I’ve been waiting for one to come along that tasks my PC. He’s right, it’s been too long: there’s been nothing spacey to make my PC creak in the longest time. In other news: I’m going to crowd-fund a PC capable of playing it.

Annnnd right as I was wondering how to end this post without posting the same trailer he’s already released, it turns out there was a GDC Online talk about Star Citizen. It is almost an hour long, but it has slides!

__________________

« | »

, , , , .

80 Comments »

  1. bill says:

    Wake me up when Lawrence Holland gets on kickstarter.

    • danimalkingdom says:

      This.

    • xcopy says:

      ^Ten times this.^

    • Cinek says:

      Got forbid it.
      No need to even more support this monopoly and give them a change from every game that wants to start independently.
      Going on by themselves was possibly the best decision people made in there!

    • RedFaust says:

      THis game is the new EVE anyway, enough to hold on to the time holland come to get his ass kickstarted !!

      • skittles says:

        Not really. A lot of people don’t realize you are only getting access to the scripted campaign with this pledging. You only get a copy of the somewhat EVE-type game if $5mill+ is raised. Or at least certainly the online component, they aren’t really that clear about it. Go look in the stretch goals.

  2. Thirith says:

    I had an odd reaction to the reveal video. I greatly enjoyed Wing Commander (at least until the fourth part… never played the fifth), but I felt that the trailer was pandering to me. First the whole “PC only!” smugness (PC elitism has always rubbed me the wrong way, seeing how it usually comes with a big helping of “people who play on consoles are more stupid than me!”), then the way in which it kept screaming, “Remember Wing Commander?”, down to the enemy design, camera angles etc. It just felt to me that the trailer was banking on our a) nostalgia and b) need to feel exclusive and superior to ‘consoletards’.

    • D3xter says:

      You can’t make a game like this on console hardware as it is right now, FACT.
      And the most likely reason why we haven’t been getting very fulfilling PC gaming experiences until late is that the Xbox took off like it did between 2001-2005. Entire genres have all but died out in that period and are slowly trying for a return with the recent “Indie boom”, success of Digital Distribution and democratization of the game funding process.

      You might think of it whatever you want, but it’s nothing but the truth.

      • Thirith says:

        Apart from the technical bells and whistles (which not every PC will be able to do), why shouldn’t a console be able to support a Wing Commander-style game?

        • D3xter says:

          Complex AI, Physics Components and computations, Amount of objects and entities displayed at once on the screen, Complex AI, decreased scope of level design because of 512MB RAM limitation, client/server infrastructure of PC including patching process and all that a lot harder to do on consoles if you aren’t SONY or Microsoft and publishing a game on your own platform (the “certification” process alone…), Complex AI, entirely different UI and control-paradigm that has to be within certain rules and has to be adjusted for a specific controller instead of Joystick/Mouse+Keyboard/Virtual Reality Headset/Whatever, lots and lots of other platform limitations, and did I already mention Complex AI?

          For that matter, why do you think that a lot of MMOs haven’t been pushed out to consoles, because publishers don’t like money?

          In regards to Project Eternity Avellone was already bitching about some of this too :P

          “And it’ll be PC only, because Avellone is “tired of designing content and interactions that caters to consoles and console controllers.”

          “Those limitations affect RPG mechanics and content more than players may realize (especially for players who’ve never played a PC RPG and realize what’s been lost over the years), and often doesn’t add to the RPG experience,” he told me.”
          “1UP: Does an isometric perspective open up opportunities to do things that would be impossible or less effective in a first person or over-the-shoulder RPG?

          Party-based combat, for certain. 3rd person and 1st person don’t tend to allow for a lot of companions (trying to govern 5 people plus your PC in a 3rd or 1st person game usually means letting their AI run as it will). Also, the controller scheme for a console game doesn’t tend to allow for it, either.

          In the Infinity Engine games, you were able to guide and select a party to attack creatures and threats, and having that level of up-high-in-the-sky control and sense of tactics created for much different RPG fights and reminds me more of a pen-and-paper gaming session with tabletop miniatures.”

          • Werthead says:

            Most of those limitations apply only to the current generation of consoles. The new consoles should be out by the time STAR CITIZEN drops in (late?) 2014 and I’d imagine those at least would be able to handle the game.

            Your points about controller limitations still stand, of course.

          • Cinek says:

            Yea, I already see myself buying one of these online-only pieces of junk that will be outrun by high-end PCs in the day of release already, like it always been.

          • Cooper says:

            @werthead

            Building for as-yet-unannounced consoles without widely available dev kits.

            Sounds like fun.

            I’d rather a “PC first and if possible a port to nextbox or whatever down the line” approach. Would be a switch of the usual.

          • Zeewolf says:

            I think people will generally be disappointed with the next console generation. Look at what’s happened during the last few years on the Xbox 360. What kind of customers has Microsoft been focusing on? What kind of services and innovation have they given us? What direction has the dashboard, to use a very simple example, taken?

            So, is there any reason this is going to change when they announce a new console? That they’ll suddenly go “hey, let’s try to please the hardcore gamers now!”? Naah. I have a feeling the next Xbox will be a fair bit more powerful than the Xbox 360, but nowhere near the standard the Xbox 360 set when it launched. And it’ll presented as a gaminc-centered entertainment hub first and foremost, not a games machine. I expect Sony to do the same.

          • ScubaMonster says:

            @Cinek – online only? You mean like the vast majority of DRM PC games being released right now? lol. Plus, you have no clue whether or not you’ll need to be online to play the next gen consoles. You don’t this gen, unless it’s online only like Warhawk and only a handful of other games. And what good will your super awesome hardware be when companies still make multiplatform games adhere to console specs, just like they do now with rare exceptions?

            @Zeewolf – What are you talking about? Xbox and Playstation users love their consoles. I don’t really read to many “omg I hate my console” posts. The only posts you ever read are “my Xbox is great, your PS3 and everything else sucks”. Spoken like a true PC elitist when you say people are going to be disappointed. You don’t even know what they are making. Unlike many here, I actually enjoy my Xbox and PS3 right along with my PC. If anything, when next gen consoles come out with more capability, PC gaming is going to be hurting even more (not that I’d necessarily say it’s suffering right now, but the clear focus from 90% of publishers is consoles).

          • ScubaMonster says:

            Also @Cinek – “Online only sucks!” *proceeds to load up Steam with their 100+ game library* Oh wait I forgot, Steam has a crappy offline mode.

          • Tatourmi says:

            I don’t want to get in the debate but just to set things straight: I consider my (Or should I say “our” as we bought the Xbox with a friend) console to be a huge disappointment, and I do think it sucks quite a bit.

            It is not really the problem of the console itself, I used to love consoles, it is the problem of some of the decisions taken by microsoft and devs. Four reasons mainly:

            1: Almost no games support up to four people nowadays, and it was even more true back in the day when we bought it. Halo is great fun, love the series, honestly, but when we saw that gears of wars or even l4d (Which we didn’t buy, just heard about it) didn’t have a 4 player coop mode… Well. We bought our console to play with friends locally, not online. We have a pc for that. And we didn’t find anything half decent out there.

            2: On the subject of online, there is no way we were going to pay for multiplayer.

            3: The interface of the xbox is, to me, incredibly frustrating. (Profiles mainly…)

            4: The price of games went up even more.

            Today we play split screen on the pc, indie games mostly but not exclusively, via four usb Xbox 360 gamepads. As far as I am concerned the only thing that didn’t feel like a huge letdown was those gamepads. Still though, I see no point now in owning a console if there is almost no way to play with friends on it. Sure, the hardware is more expensive, but the price of the games makes up for it, and it can be and is used for other things. I am not being aggressive towards console gamers or anything, hell, it maybe is great for some people out there, but I can honnestly say that my console did not deliver what I expected out of it: Conviviality.

        • aepervius says:

          The number of functions such a game require make it nigh impossible on pad. target enemy, target next enemy, target previous enemy, target nearest enemy, target friendly, target mission goal, map, ECM, change weapon, launch missile, communicate, shield/weapon/motor energy repartition, engine speed setting, setting speed to follow goal and match speed, use additional devices, change radar settings etc…etc… On a pad with 8 buttons ? Sure you can imagine to put in some radial menu or whatnot. But many of those functions must be called in real time, but would not be possible in menu. So you would ahve to either make the game NOT need those function in real time, dumb it down, or make the control scheme really clever with each button allowing more than 3 or 4 functions. And as previous responder said : huge limitation by the 512 RAM.

          That’s why such a game is not on console despite console. At least not without simplification on control and gameplay.

          • MrUnimport says:

            We have actual screen real estate nowadays, we don’t need to limit targeting to a single ship anymore. Press once to enable secondary lock-on on target closest to reticle, press when locked to fire. Alternatively double-tap to dumbfire, although in Freespace 2 you never dumbfired any of the lock-on missiles because then they did absolutely nothing at all.

            And ugh, was there ever a reason to introduce the arbitrary “select next target”? Unless there are five ships in your mission there is absolutely no reason to cycle through them in order, “target ship in reticle” was always the way to go.

          • subedii says:

            Actually, if we’re going to talk Freespace for a second:

            - Target nearest enemy
            - Target escort / VIP / Whatever ship you’re supposed to protect
            - Target nearest enemy attacking escort ship (or: Target your target’s nearest attacker)
            - Target nearest missile / bomber
            - Target subsystem (variants for next / previous to scroll through them, and one for target under reticule)

            These and variants thereof were all commands that I was using constantly. And I do MEAN constantly. And that’s just for targetting.

            For that matter it was a very similar story when I was playing TIE Fighter. It made things SO much more efficient to be able to scroll through all these targets by type and distance.

            So no, simply using Target Under Reticule was not “always the way to go”. At least not for me.

          • FCA says:

            The controller issue is the big one. But then, I always played these games with a joystick with the most commonly used 5-10 things mapped to buttons on the joystick (fire, secondary fire, target closest enemy, match target speed, target closest enemy attacking me, target closest enemy attacking escort, switch weapon, other stuff…).

            The console specifications are a red herring, just look at the PC classifications of when these games where big (hint: Tie Fighter came out in 1994, Freespace 2 came out in 1999. Console outmatch any PC from those times. The controller, plus the tendency to sit right in front of the screen (rather than a few feet away, sitting on a couch) is what makes the console vs PC experience different in this case. And of course the target audience: space “sims” are seen as much nerdier than Modern Shooter: Shoot Some More, and thus have a smaller target.

          • MrUnimport says:

            Subedii, have you played Freespace recently? I’m betting you have. Our screens are so large nowadays that vast portions of the screen, once filled with useful gauges and information, go unused. There’s no need anymore for such complex targeting controls, which for the most part only serve to switch the big target box from one ship to another.

            Targetting subsystems I grant you, but it doesn’t seem like a terrible obstacle for console versions of the game to have access to slow-mo menus.

            As for graphics, most space sims have one edge over regular games when it comes to rendering: there’s no dirt.

    • SanguineAngel says:

      heralding a game as being PC only and highlighting the greatness of the PC as a platform does not equate to PC elitism. Rather, it’s an attempt to redress the PC being oft overlooked or marginalised – at least that’s how it came across to me. At no point did the trailer say “Consoles suck.” or “PC’s are the best!” or anything to that effect.

      Rather, your second point applies. It’s an appeal to nostalgia. It an appeal directly at the fans who loved wing commander, which I don’t have a problem with. You list an appeal to nostalgia as if it’s a bad thing. Whereas nostalgia is precisely why we’re now ending up (at last) with the fabulous XCOM, the marvelous Dishonored, the pretty Good DX:HR and on the horizon some pretty hefty success for a number of kickstarter games including Project Eternity, Shaker and of course this wonderful looking gem.

      For myself, the wing commander games were among some of the greatest fun I had on the PC (I even preferred them over Freespace, which I also loved).

      Most importantly, we’ve not had anything of Wing Commander’s calibre for a very long time.

      • Thirith says:

        Everything you’re saying is correct, SanguineAngel. It’s not so much the appeal to nostalgia, it’s more that I didn’t see much beyond nostalgia. It’s the feeling I got from the trailer, not a deep and reasoned interpretation or critique.

        • subedii says:

          Considering the game isn’t even scheduled for release for 2 more years, I have to wonder what exactly they were supposed to show?

          As it stands I felt they did a really good job waiting until they could release an in-engine trailer that looked pretty freaking impressive for a game that hasn’t even hit Alpha, and they’ve also talked a lot already about what they’re expecting to do with the game.

          All that, and yes, there’s the nostalgia factor and the legacy of Wing Commander / Privateer / StarLancer / Freelancer.

          Honestly, it’s a heck of a lot more than most other kickstarters would even considering kicking off with.

          • PopeJamal says:

            That doesn’t change the fact that some people (including myself) felt that there was quite a bit of PC Elitism/Pandering in that clip:

            “Give the PC Fanboys what they want! Get them riled up and get those wallets open!”

            It’s just feels dirty in the creepy perverted old guy kind of way. (BTW, not the dev, the advertising, obviously) They came on too strong. There’s a subtle art to pandering to the likes of me, and this ain’t it. I’ll be consulting with my wallet about this purchase AFTER the release date has come and gone.

  3. Gnoupi says:

    Hopefully this is coming out soon, to satisfy the space need: http://www.egosoft.com/games/x_rebirth/info_en.php

    In other news, I also need funding for a computer to run that without suffocating

    • roryok says:

      I’ll back your new computer kickstarter if you back my one in return

    • FriendlyFire says:

      Am I alone who has zero interest in X, Kinetic Void and all that because they’re not multiplayer?

      There’s been a fair few singleplayer space sims over the years, but multiplayer are rarer than Homeworld sequels.

      • jrodman says:

        The perverse nature of crafting being worth negative value in guild wars 2 is reminding me why I don’t really need any of my games to be multiplayer.

  4. D3xter says:

    “He might even use Kickstarter for that, but his game is proving that you can do it without them.”

    He completely screwed up utilizing the first-day hype in a display of not being able to keep a Website from being hammered to death when he actually wants to make an “MMO” with the most complex amount of graphics assets and gameplay mechanics ever conceived (e.g. all the different guns and turrets in that scene he’s shown off for instance, physics, impacts etc.). Having a “demo” of a single cruiser and a few ships run is one thing, an MMO is quite another. Him having planned this out properly like he tried to tell the guy in that video at about 50 minutes in suddenly doesn’t sound like such a safe proposition. A lot of the things he said about micro-updates and constant content etc. also seemed rather far-fetched.

    I actually thought about backing this right away, but his website went down, now I’ve got all these questions in my head like:

    1) Who are those investors he has lined up, and what is their interest in this?
    2) What exactly are the details behind the game concept he is planning, his game is at a concept stage and he’s already trying to “sell” people ships and “credits”. Is it going to be Pay2Win, can you get those ships in the game and how long would something like that take? What are the details behind the monetization model he is planning to use?
    3) I heard the prototype was produced in Germany, more exactly that CryTek helped making it, who is going to work on the game and where is it going to be made, something more than “Chris Roberts” would be nice.
    4) What do all these pledge details mean? There was a thread with a lot of very valid questions on his forum: http://www.robertsspaceindustries.com/forums/topic/explanation-needed-pledge-packages-details/

    etc.

    If he’d taken the KickStarter route, chances are he might’ve already hit his budget, he did post some sort of apology about that though: http://www.robertsspaceindustries.com/the-star-citizen-announcement/

    • MrMud says:

      These are all really good questions.
      I adore space combat games (Freespace 2 being among the absolute best games ever made) but I have not pleged because of precisely these reasons.

    • Stevostin says:

      Some of those questions are not even always treated in a multi million business plan. Who cares how what is done ? The guy has been one of the most successful game producer on PC, and there’s no sound reason to assume he forgot how to keep a budget or hire the good people. And in case you doubted, the simple fact he’s able to pull out a hugely impressive (visually but gameplay too : look at that HUD !) trailer with limited money is a strong reminder that we’re dealing with someone who has proven many time great abilities at doing this better than the rest. It’s like if Carmack we’re going to ask for funding to do a fast and great looking FPS. Would you ask the guy the color of his shoes ?

      • DarkFenix says:

        Um, yes. Using blind customer faith to sell a product is not a new phenomenon. So I will question whether there’s really a plan, I will be skeptical over whether the right people are on the job. The man has proven he can do things right, good for him; so have a lot of other people in the industry though, some of them are now remembered for subsequent flops.

      • jrodman says:

        Roberts is no stranger to overestimating his ability to achieve something or overestimating the draw of Wing Commander. For example, he expected the Freddie Prinz movie to be a huge success.

    • derbefrier says:

      All good points and the reasons I decided to wait a bit before pledging. I really want to see this game be everything he claims it will be but at the same time it almost sounds too good to be true. My fears could be put to rest by simply giving out more information on his long term\short term plans and goals with the game other than vague dates. I think I will ultimately end up pledging but I going wait a bit and see what happens and see if it looks like hes going to make his goal. I would hate to have to ask for my money back if he didn’t make it.

    • HothMonster says:

      Re: 2) It says on the page that the plan is to sell in-game currency. So there isn’t a special set of items that can only be purchased with cash you simply have the option of spending time to earn money or spending cash to “earn” it. But whichever way you go about it the same items are available for all. Of course the plan and what happens in 2 years could be very different things, but at least it seems that he wants to avoid any kind of p2w system.

      I would imagine this applies to the ships being offered as well, you simply start with one instead of having to buy it after you can afford it.

    • Apocalypse says:

      What is your Online revenue model?

      Not a subscription but not free-to-play; rather a hybrid of these two business models. Much like ArenaNet’s Guild Wars 2, you will purchase the PC game and pay no recurring subscription charges. Your purchase of the game will allow you to play in the universe for free, forever! The game will offer a variety of virtual items for purchase with in-game credits allowing you to spend money on items that offer more ways to express yourself, provide convenience, and customize your experience. But the cardinal rule regarding “in-game purchases” is: Players who spend money purchasing in-game credits will have no advantage over players who spend time!
      Everything is bought with in-game credits. These purchases won’t offer any advantage over someone who puts in the “game-time” to earn the same amount of credits. You might ask, why have “in-game” purchases at all? This allows us the resources to support the game on an ongoing basis as well as continually add content.

  5. roryok says:

    What have all these legendary developers been doing up to now? It seems like Crowd-funding has made them all appear out of the woodwork with new projects

    • grunkfest says:

      This is exactly what I have been wondering. Producing crap facebook games that nobody noticed, possibly.

      • roryok says:

        … and now we’re suddenly giving them millions dollars in advance fees to produce games, while being accountable to no-one and without any chance of a refund if the game never sees the light of day.

    • RedViv says:

      A surprisingly high percentage was busy exploring social games, as a recent visit to Mobygames told me. Rather peculiar.

    • Faldrath says:

      Where’s Geoff Crammond these days?

    • adamsorkin says:

      Producing forgettable movies, apparently.

      Edit: Chris Roberts. Geoff Crammond, I can’t speak to.

    • Supahewok says:

      From what I can gather, many got tired of the industry during its conglomeration of the past decade. They either retired or moved on to new frontiers, such as social gaming. As for those who stayed, well… See what’s happened to Peter Molyneux, a legend who made a hefty string of good games, then becoming a slave of Microsoft, given little creative control, and has had his name become almost as reviled as John Romero’s. See what’s happened to Obsidian, having to subsist off of scraps of franchises publishers toss them AND STILL creating some of the most memorable games of the decade, yet they only ever got 1 original IP until now. And just look at what’s happened to Bioware. Just… Bioware.

      It may have been for the greater good that these big names fled the AAA scene. Now, the Internet has developed enough for them to make a come back.

  6. Atic Atac says:

    I still haven’t jumped on it because I am confused by the model of this game. It’s the credits that confuse me…makes it sound like a microtransaction game? Anyone have any info on this?

    • adamsorkin says:

      The game reportedly will have microtransactions for cosmetic items and some “convenience” features in the multiplayer component. Not sure exactly what part means. Apparently, all items everything will be purchasable with in-game currency, though. Sounds Guild Wars-esque.

      • Lobotomist says:

        He says: Monetisation like Guild Wars 2. Buy the game , no subscription , with some cosmetic items in game shop. (Although i admit I allready wasted $ in GW shop)

  7. CaLe says:

    Robert Space Industries? More like Repetitive Strain Injuries, if you know what I mean, and I think you do.

  8. Artist says:

    Majestic video opening… the carrier can obviously roll and open/close the hangar like a pro…

    • kizza42 says:

      That seemed odd to me as well, Are we to expect cap ships doing barrel rolls?

  9. Simon Hawthorne says:

    I’d back it if it was a game with a guaranteed single-player campaign.

    • HothMonster says:

      There is a sp campaign. How deep or good it will be is anyone’s guess. But it seems like he is pitching it as an optional starting off point, you join the military and do your stint in the sp game and then you are expected to move into the mmo universe with whatever rewards the sp gives you. Or you have the option of skipping the sp and getting right into the mmo but with a cash and status disadvantage.

      So the sp could end up just being a few levels that basically act like a tutorial for the world and mechanics or it could be a nice full length sp game. Personally I wouldn’t back it at this point if all I wanted was sp because it doesn’t seem to be the focus. But I don’t understand why you wouldn’t want an mmo space sim, the genre has always seemed to be begging for it.

      • SanguineAngel says:

        I don’t think so. Unfortunately I cannot watch this vid at work so perhaps things have changed but all the previous info he issued signified that the SP campaign was a major priority. Also, does he mention MMO in this new vid because my understanding is that this is not an MMO but aims to have shared servers like freelancer, which players on the same server able to board each others ships etc within that instance, which you can jump in and out of. And if you choose, you can play the SP campaign with friends (although it will have a dedicated offline mode)

        • HothMonster says:

          Yes the sp can be played in co-op. I say MMO referring to the server that will be run by the company as I imagine it will be quite massive and obviously online and multiplayer. But yes you can never play on the official servers and private servers will be an option. Those may or may not be less massive but I think it still qualifies as an mmo if one of your friends happens to be running the server. I don’t know, and I don’t know if they do yet, how moving from server to server will work. Seems like having that option available would be rife for cheating, make private server give yourself lots of stuff then join main server, but who knows at this point.

          As far as SP being a major focus, I was under the impression it is less of a focus than the mmo(server based open world sandbox) version and that it wouldn’t be getting as much love until they reach a higher goal than the 2mm base. I may be misinterpreting something though.

          • ThTa says:

            Actually, the SP is the initial focus, since it’s easier to pull off. The “MMO” aspect is 30 months off at the absolute least (given enough funding), whereas the Squadron 42 campaign is projected to be 18 months off if the $2 million goal is hit.

            (Admittedly, the small scale proof of concept VS Multiplayer has an even shorter time ’till supposed release, at 12 months. But as I said, that’s mostly proof of concept stuff.)

      • Simon Hawthorne says:

        Because I personally don’t have the time or internet connection to properly invest in an MMO, but I can see how it would be fun :-)

        And my understanding is the same as yours – because I’m only interested in SP, it would be an even bigger roll of the dice for me. I imagine SP would be the first thing to be cut if they ran into trouble as well.

    • Walter Kim says:

      Just want to clarify: the trailers you’re watching with the “Squadron 42″ logo? That IS the single-player campaign. (Although you can play it with friends or on the global server, if you want.)

      Here’s the thing: it’s a full-on, Wing Commander 1-style campaign, branching missions and all. I don’t believe Chris Roberts mentions this in the GDC announcement, but I got to interview him afterwards and talked to him about it.

      So yeah, if you’re hesitant about pledging because you don’t think there’s a single-player campaign, rest assured there will be.

      • wodin says:

        If thats the case he needs to announce it now. Go to the fan forum and all you get from them is it’s some kind of tutorial..go somewhere else and they say it all depends how much money is raised.

        Listne to what Chris says and it’s obvious it’s the MMO side he really is interested in. The way he says once the campaign is out of the way you can join in the MMO side sounds like it’s just some side event to bigger things (In his mind),.

        I’m really not certain that where going to get what would really be a whole game in it’s own right (Squadron 42) that could be sold at top retail price aswell as a huge MMO and all that entails…no chance. Most of the development time an dost will go into the MMO it’s obvious. Chris may say it’s going to be full on but I have serious doubts where getting two indepth amazing games for the price of one. He should have made them separate games altogether..

        • Walter Kim says:

          Well the MMO side doesn’t require the huge investment of time and resources that a typical MMO would, because it relies heavily on a dynamic economy, procedural “content”, and Eve-like factions to keep the world alive.

      • Apocalypse says:

        HE did mentione it in the 50-something minutes video. Full scale Wing Commander-Style Single Player Campaign with Branching Missions.

        Once you have done this millitary campaign you are a freelancer in a privateer style online universe until you join again for the next campaign which will be delievered via content updates. 2nd Campaign will be most likely a DLC, the last part is speculation from me.

    • MelbourneFL says:

      Here is what Chris Roberts has to say about the concerns regarding the SP campaign:

      Hi, Chris Roberts here.

      I’ve seen a few concerned posts on the Facebook stream about whether there’s going to be a single player game, and whether if the budget gets tight will that be the first feature that gets cut.

      I just want to be clear with everyone, Squadron 42 is an integral part of the Star Citizen experience and it will be the classic Wing Commander experience that everyone loved (with
      out the FMV though!)

      In fact the order of the development means that there’s no way that Squadron 42 will be cut, as the features for this, and multi-player dogfights are the first steps in building Star Citizen. The prototype that I showed already includes most of the functionality that I need for Squadron 42. There’s still a lot of polish to do on the dogfighting and assets to be created but Squadron 42 is not the difficult part of Star Citizen.

      The difficult part is building the open world that Squadron 42 fits inside. I’m confident of that too as I’ve built this open world twice, and have done a lot upfront technical design work to avoid some of the problems that I dealt with on Freelancer

      So ambitious yes. Achievable? Most definitely!

      I think that answers most questions.

  10. wodin says:

    Please be aware if you want an amazing SP experience here then just wait for more info…the bits and pieces I’ve picked up so far haven’t sounded promising so I’m holding on.

    The SP campaign content depends on how much money they get..it’s not the focus of the game..plus all the sandbox is sealed off in it. I’ve heard silly figures like 4 million before we get a proper fully fledged SP campaign\game.

    It was the freelancer crowd and fans that convinced Chris to make an MMO rather than go with the WC fans who want a SP game.

    • FriendlyFire says:

      SP space simmers have quite a few games to play with. MP space sim fans plain and simply don’t.

      • wodin says:

        No decent ones though. We have X series which is to economy minded for me and then the rather old Freespace 2.

        EVE and Armada are already out there for MMO’s. EVE being huge. So you have just as much choice as SP gamers.

        I would like a sandbox single player game but it’s not to be. Baring that a proper single player campaign thats a game in it’s own right rather than tacked onto an MMO game.

        I think he should have made two separate games..the MMO and a SP game.

        MMO’s with griefers and chat filled with rude offensive language isn’t my idea of a good time.

    • HothMonster says:

      As a WC I must say that I would have been calling for the mmo/server side sandbox version if anyone asked my opinion.

    • MrUnimport says:

      As a fan of The Ongoing Misadventures of the Galactic Terran-Vasudan Alliance And Its Marked Inability to Fight Off Alien Invasions With Any Degree of Finality I would really like to see a well-crafted SP campaign in the same vein.

    • Walter Kim says:

      Squadron 42 is the single player campaign. Playing it multiplayer is optional.

    • MelbourneFL says:

      Here is what Chris Roberts has to say about the SP campaign concerns:

      Hi, Chris Roberts here.

      I’ve seen a few concerned posts on the Facebook stream about whether there’s going to be a single player game, and whether if the budget gets tight will that be the first feature that gets cut.

      I just want to be clear with everyone, Squadron 42 is an integral part of the Star Citizen experience and it will be the classic Wing Commander experience that everyone loved (with
      out the FMV though!)

      In fact the order of the development means that there’s no way that Squadron 42 will be cut, as the features for this, and multi-player dogfights are the first steps in building Star Citizen. The prototype that I showed already includes most of the functionality that I need for Squadron 42. There’s still a lot of polish to do on the dogfighting and assets to be created but Squadron 42 is not the difficult part of Star Citizen.

      The difficult part is building the open world that Squadron 42 fits inside. I’m confident of that too as I’ve built this open world twice, and have done a lot upfront technical design work to avoid some of the problems that I dealt with on Freelancer

      So ambitious yes. Achievable? Most definitely!

      I think that ansers most questions.

  11. Continuity says:

    so thats about $95 per backer. Astounding, almost too good to be true…

  12. RakeShark says:

    Hey hey, that’s me asking the question at 54:30!

  13. jrodman says:

    Aaand the webserver is broken again.

  14. Baresark says:

    I backed this and my only concern is that backed is backed and that is that. It’s not like Kickstarter where if it fails then you don’t pay. I just hope that $2Million is actually enough to do what he wants to do.

    • Walter Kim says:

      You do have the option to be refunded if they don’t meet their goal. There’s a checkbox you can tick when you’re making your pledge.

  15. AoXo says:

    The only thing that bothers me about all of this is … “aliens”. -.- I really liked Freelancer (and tolerated the Nomads existance), but in the freeplay it was all about the human civilisations that had been built and their relationships with each other and the factions within them. I’m sure Wing Commander was great, but I don’t want to see big ass stupid looking cat people.

  16. wodin says:

    Make sense of the stretch goals if you can…??

    5 million before we get a proper single player game by the sounds of it..also don’t understand why 5 million before you can play the actual proper online game..really doesn’t make sense..so 2 million just gets the alpha online game??

    If thats right taking $800,000 of peoples money to then announce they now need 5 million to get the full game seems wrong to me.

    http://www.robertsspaceindustries.com/star-citizen/

  17. MelbourneFL says:

    I’m kind of amazed how sceptical people are about this game. There is a lot of information out there about how the game will be, about the payment model, about the SP campaign, about the “MMO” part, about almost everything. In fact it is much more than there was for Double Fine Adventure or Project Eternity at the time when they were announced and even now Star Citizen/Squadron 42 seems to be better defined than those two games to me. There is almost too much information…so that people don’t find the parts they are looking for anymore.

    On top of that…it is Chris Roberts. The guy that made some of the greatest games ever. He had one bad project…the Wing Commander movie…and that was not a game. All other projects were great…he made some of the most iconic games ever. I think he deserves some credit for that. For what it is worth…I believe that he can pull off what he claims.

  18. MadMatty says:

    Well, if Kickstarter is cutting out the middle man, why don´t we just cut out the middle man which is Kickstarter also, while we´re at it?

    … and the Dev´s simply use their own site, use similar rules, perhaps with some changes? Devs can decide individually.