Star Citizen’s $20m Goal: First-Person Combat

Star Citizen just crowd-sourced a million bucks in about a week, and they’re up over $18m now, which unlocks “exclusive” starting star systems for backers. What does this money pile mean for this colossally ambitious beast of a game as a whole? Well, Chairman Roberts explains that it means it’s going to be even more ambitious: “First person combat on select lawless planets. Don’t just battle on space stations and platforms… take the fight to the ground!”

Yes, having $20m means they’re going to throw in an additional planetary FPS segment for free. Not sure that’s really the best idea, since FPS isn’t really their focus (although there is apparently some ship boarding action planned) – obviously this will be made easier by it having Cryengine tools and first person walky bits like the hangar – but it’s interesting to see them go in this direction. Man, this game’s genesis is going to be one to follow, isn’t it? Time to stock up on popcorn, one way or another.


  1. gunny1993 says:

    … must …. keep …. hype …down


    • realitysconcierge says:

      Hype for a game so far away makes me more sad than anything… Especially when they just keep adding more stuff to it…

      • gunny1993 says:

        It’s hard not to when they just keep saying all the right things.

        • darkath says:

          I’d welcome more “real things” than “right things”.

          • gunny1993 says:

            Well you’ll only be able to tell that after release.

          • hotmaildidntwork says:

            You can clamber around in the ship hangar if you’re already a backer, although the value of that is probably debatable.

      • Apocalypse says:

        I does help that you can already download a working exe and check out the engine I guess.

        My ship looks incredible, my hangar runs just fine even on garbage notebooks, and overall I am exited to actually start PLAYING the game in December.

        Makes it real enough for me, I guess.

        • JakeDust says:

          I might be a bit too cynical, but that basically shows that CryEngine works (which is good) and that they have artists to create the models (which is also good), but nothing more. It is a tech demo, but one where almost all of the technology shown was already developed by others.

          I do hope that everything goes well, but I’m not confident enough to back it, especially since we have X Rebirth coming up in two months.

        • TheGameSquid says:

          Was about to say the exact same thing. In fact, all they have so far is a pretty unmodified CryEngine. There is no “engine” to speak of yet, considering the core game is about space flight, and they haven’t implemented a flight model yet, so yeah, they have nothing to show.

          I find it a bit odd that the first bit we get to see of a space sim is….. walking around?

          • borkbork says:

            To be fair, the game started crowdfunding barely a year ago. It isn’t due out of beta for another 1.5 – 2 years. The ability to walk around and view early assets in-game was mainly just a treat from the developers for their loyal fans/backers.

            Not sure exactly what you mean by “fight model”, but there’s year old videos of them showing demos of ships flying around, shooting each other, in Cryengine, both human and AI controlled.

          • rgb_astronaut says:

            Weren’t those flights/fights pre-rendered? And the game is out of beta much sooner, actually. Squadron 42 should be out next autumn, and by Xmas this year they promised to release fighting module.

          • Apocalypse says:

            As you and Jake said yourself: They have the engine from Crytek, they need to build those assets anyway, its an easy intermission that has very good marketing value and good fun for us backers as well.
            I enjoy watching my ships, checking out the cockpits, sitting at the controls, playing around with the engine and assets. Finding bugs, report issues with the art direction, etc … and by this Christmas I shall launch from this very hangar into space and bring those very assets to good use in the dogfight alpha.

            As Easter present I can chill out in the bars of star citizen, and the summer next year shall be filled with testing of the boarding FPS combat and the squad 42 single player campaign.
            (link to

            The hangar modul is for me just one little step that makes the game more real already, because I can launch the game RIGHT NOW and check out some of the assets, or even can load up the models into the sandbox and start playing around with mod ideas, create new assets fitting into the game, etc

            The whole idea behind this kickstarter was to have a crowd-founded game that is developed in an incredible open way so that we, the fans, can enjoy the whole process so much more. The modular development is anyway a best practice method for software development, so why should they hid their alpha works from their backers? ;-)

            Unlike when pre-ordering I am getting this whole experience of seeing how the game develops and changes, I am actually getting value for my money throughout the whole thing and I have to pay less, so I actually get rewarded for my risk that the game may actually be not as good as I did hoped for.

          • screecwe says:

            None of what you just posted is at all true.

            CIG purchased the most expensive license to the CryEngine which gave them low level engine access. They also brought in Crytek employees to work at CIG. In it’s default licensed state, the CryEngine cannot do what they need it to do.

            As for the “haven’t implemented a flight model yet” comment, again…simply false. The video in the original crowdfunding announcement trailer, was made with flyable ships in real time(NOT prerendered). There are plenty of videos of Chris Roberts flying Hornets against rudimentary AI enemy ships.

            So if you’re going to knock Star Citizen, try not to be ignorant when you do.

  2. IgnitingIcarus says:

    Hey, this isn’t right. They already planned on having first-person combat. The big plan here is to add planetary combat. That’s the addition. Right?

    *edit* I did some digging to make sure, and as I said, first-person combat was already planned long before this. The only real news here is that they’re adding planetary combat. There was an AMA on Reddit 10 months ago where he talks about having boarding parties and you’ll (possibly) be able to raid asteroid bases and space stations.

    It’s all here link to

    • Ruairi says:

      Yeah, They mentioned right at the start about FPS Boarding tactics at the start, Heck the Cutlass(which I’m a proud owner) Is design for boarding actions with gear to help out. The extra stretch goal was simply for areas on planets to be designed and build around it seems.

      Edit* Nuts, you already edited that in. Nvm.

    • Taidan says:

      Aye. From what I understand, FPS combat during boarding actions and on board space stations has been part of the core design from the beginning.

      I’m almost pretty sure that it was mentioned during one of the livestreams from waaaay back that this would be the only way for player organisations to acquire a few of the largest ships in the game.

      I am reasonably excited for this game, but the fact that they’re already selling in-game currency for real money have damped my enthusiasm for the “Persistent Universe” somewhat. I can already foresee there being a contingent of players with a combination of far too much money and time on theirs hands dominating early combats with their fancy-pants gear.

      Worse still, as a gamer with real-life responsibilities and relatively little free time or disposable income, who plays for pure escapism, it’s a hard sell to get excited about a virtual universe that I’d be entering already designated as part of a disadvantaged underclass.

      • bills6693 says:

        Exactly my thoughts. I was keen to back at the lowest level to get a ship etc on the kickstarer, and also got myself a decal. But even back then I was worried about geting in-game credits and there being much bigger, better, more interesting ships for you if you backed for more and more money. Compared to the starter-ship which looks really pathetic in comparison.

        I’m more excited for the ‘military’ side than the open universe now because at least that will be balanced and hopefully fun. And hopefully there isn’t a huge grind-wall to getting better ships in the game. Because if it is a loooong grind to get better ships, with an alternative $15-30 to just buy a better ship, its really going to make it pretty awful for those that have busy lives and not much income.

    • Liudeius says:

      “although there is apparently some ship boarding action planned”
      But only in an uncertain manner.

      And the title is still “$20 million = FPS combat,” when in reality, $20 million just = on planet FPS combat (Which would be added post release even if $20 million isn’t reached), ship boarding and space station FPS combat has long been a feature.

      The stretch goals from $11 million to $21 million aren’t anything too noteworthy anyway, they are all minor bonuses to encourage buying. The real stretch goals will be $21 million + (After the point which is said to be a “AAA quality” final product).

  3. Paul says:

    Cryengine is already first person shooter engine first and foremost, so this might not be too difficult to implement. And with the amount of money they raised…

  4. badirontree says:

    yep it was always planned but they will add on lawless planets fights now…

    So if you land on a pirate planet you can kill all the people that you want… :D
    Just make your inheritance papers because head-shot = perma-dead :D

    • BobbyDylan says:

      Which is pretty easy, if you think about it. They’re already including FPS combat on ships, so just creating a map with blue skyboxes, instead of black ones, add some volumetric clouds, and a few rocks instead of walways….

      Bam. Easy.

      • Liudeius says:

        They are already making landing points on planets too, so they already have all the resources needed for on-planet combat, they just need to build some levels.

        Until $21 million, none of the stretch goals are actually stretch goals, just little things to encourage paying.

  5. MeestaNob says:

    I suppose seeing as they are using the CryEngine for this, an extension into the FPS realm isn’t that difficult.

  6. Anthile says:

    Just as a comparison, The Witcher 2 had a budget of roughly $10.3 million, Skyrim ~$80-100 million, TOR ~$200 million and GTA 5 no less than $266 million.

    • ZeDestructor says:

      Got sources on those numbers?

      • Werthead says:

        link to

        £170 million = $266 million, including marketing.

        I could well believe it, actually. GTA5 is a slam-dunk and spending roughly twice the budget of GTA4 on a game that’s quite a lot more than twice the size (allegedly) makes sense.

    • stahlwerk says:

      To be fair, Skyrim, TOR and GTA have had ludicrous amounts of PR (remember those insane-quality Videos released 4 years before TOR was finished?) and used an in-house developed engine.

      Also, IIRC Roberts has secured additional private funding that may not be reflected in the $18M amount.

      • Wodge says:

        RSI won’t be using investor money when it hits $22m, will be completely crowd funded.

        • Liudeius says:

          I think investors were called off at $6 million (The Kickstarter was to show the investors there was interest, upon the immense response, CR realized he didn’t need investors).

          $21 million is the point at which CR says SC will match AAA quality, not the point at which there will be no investors.

    • Yaksha says:

      Only thing those number proves is that CDProjekt RED knows how to budget wisely and still make a great game with passion. Big studios and Indies could learn a lot from them and it gives hope that this game will be in the likes of The Witcher 2 production values.

      • Bhaz0r says:

        Exactly. They had ~20% of the budget that Dragon Age 2 had and they still effortlessly blew Bioware out the water. It isn’t about budgets it’s about budgeting and that’s where AAA publishers completely fail. For example I’m willing to bet that the publishers for Skyrim and GTAV spent three times more on advertising and PR than they ever did on game development.

        • realitysconcierge says:

          What projekt red did with that sort of budget is nothing short of amazing.

      • dE says:

        Does anyone have an adjusted number for those $10 million? One that factors in the vastly higher wages of let’s say USA based Developers in comparison to Polish Developers, as well as the different day by day operational costs?
        Because that’s what I’m wondering whenever people use that number as an argument for CD Projekts Superiority. Don’t get me wrong, I like what they do. But I can’t help but wonder.
        When mobile phone factories from Nokia closed down in germany and moved to Romania (and other countries) because of operational costs, people threw a massive shitstorm. But in the realm of games, the lower operational costs are seen as superior budgeting and everyone should take notice. Weird.

        • someone else says:

          Obsidian Entertainment is also “just” 120 people and there’s no way they could create a game like the Witcher 2 for the same amount of money in US dollars. Moreover, CD Projekt in its entirety has over 300 employees.

          Lower overhead and the fact that it cost them over 30 million to make the Witcher 2 in their money contributed a lot to its “low” budget in US dollars. They’re not particularly better-managed than any US developer.

        • Disillusion3D says:

          someone else says:
          “…. Lower overhead and the fact that it cost them over 30 million to make the Witcher 2 in their money contributed a lot to its “low” budget in US dollars. They’re not particularly better-managed than any US developer.”

          Even the adjusted numbers show that they managed to make Witcher 2 for 40% less than DA2 costed.

        • Apocalypse says:

          DA2 is not and shall never be the benchmark for anything.

          Ok, maybe for one thing: If your game is worse than DA2 than cancel it.

        • Disillusion3D says:

          Apocalypse says:
          “…. If your game is worse than DA2 than cancel it.”

          I wish that all games had to pass that tollgate before release ;-)

        • Josh W says:

          Trying not to go down the rabbit hole here, but you can look at it like this:

          Developer costs are significantly about what lifestyle you allow yourself when working on a game, based on existing funds, how much you think the game is going to make, and generally how nice a life you want.

          In those terms, it can be convienient to think about what is an equivalent lifestyle in different countries, via measures of “purchase power parity”, where currencies are judged for their capacity to purchase basic baskets of goods. This suggests that in poland, the złoty (their pounds) goes a long way, about 1.7 times further, meaning that the cost in ppp corrected dolars would be 17,000 , assuming star citizen will be made in the US.

          There’s a whole bundle of other things about inflation, dividing the costs between people, etc. and to be honest, if you want to look at developer efficiency directly, it’s probably better to look at the amount of time devoted to the game, including the crazy hours during crunch. Then you can cut out the effects of lifestyle and costs and see how much work they actually had to do. You can also look at the working conditions independently, the strain it put on them; people doing an aweful lot in a short time but coming out drained and exhausted means they worked heroicly but not maybe not as efficiently as other people who took an extra two months and kept their sanity and enthusiasm throughout the process.

          You can also compare the amount of external resources used, although unless you’re just going back to the original idea of overall cost in raw currency, you’re going to end up with a lot of overlapping efficiency measures; people used these tools, saving them time, but increasing their external resource cost. Did it make sense to do so? Generally there’s an estimated budget comparison at the time, but often it’s about fun; if the costs end up being similar enough, will they get more gratification from testing and planning a new engine or reworking a what someone else has made?

  7. shimeril says:

    I really need to start reading these emails RSI keep sending me as a backer. But I’m not going to go mad on the hype. Plenty of other stuff to play while I wait for this to be finished.

  8. c-Row says:

    I already wrote how I feel that Roberts is trying to bite off more than he can chew, and things like this really don’t help a bit. They should release the game they pitched first and worry about additional stuff later.

    • Riithi says:

      Totally agreed, this smells a lot like what Creative Assembly did with Rome2.
      If you have extra money, just polish the hell out of your core features.

      • Taidan says:

        Having lived through Derek Smart, (and still having the original shiny boxed release of Battlecruiser 300AD v1 in my attic) I’m still wary, but as long as Squadron 42 turns out half-decent I’ll consider my investment justified.

    • -Spooky- says:


    • gunny1993 says:

      Does it say that these extra features will be released when the game is?

      Could be that they just add this stuff after release as free DLC.

    • Tom De Roeck says:

      actually, first person combat is part of the original scope.

    • CelticPixel says:

      I have similar feelings. You can promise people the world but it’s all about the execution. I absolutely wish them the best, but the more grand promises they make (and in fact the more funding they secure) the more cautious I become. It wouldn’t be the first game project to promise grand ideas with a budget of millions then die on its ass.

    • Aaarrrggghhh says:

      Next to this only being an addition to what was already planed not all of the stretch goal features will make it into the first release. Some will only be added further down the development cycle.

    • FriendlyFire says:

      Even the original pitch was worryingly ambitious. Remember, Roberts is a bit like Molyneux for broken promises… Freelancer was supposed to be dramatically more ambitious than it ended up being, but they ran out of money and went way over any predicted release date.

      While I’ve backed the game, I’m still firmly on the “I’ll believe it when I see it” side of things.

      • gunny1993 says:

        If freelancer was a broken promise then I hope beyond hope he delivers on this.

        • JakeDust says:

          Roberts worked on it for three years, then sold Freelancer to Microsoft and left the project, and it still took Microsoft almost three more years to finish it (with almost none of the features Roberts advertised, like a completely dynamic world, seamless multiplayer and basically everything he is promising to do with Star Citizen). Of course, Freelancer ended up being a quite good game, but I’m not sure if Roberts is the one to be thanked for that.

    • GiantPotato says:

      Putting a FPS and space sim in the same game is a lot like putting a MMO and SP campaign in the same game, in that there’s a good chance that each concept will end up compromising the other. I wish these guys well, but I just don’t see a lot of discipline in their approach.

      • hotmaildidntwork says:

        There’s a certain amount of sense in the way that they’re doing it. The basic, indivisible unit of most space games is the spaceship and the game centers around it, the crew often abstract. Star Citizen seems to be built more around the spaceship *crew*, which is an approach I’ve always wanted to see a triple A game take.

        Still have no idea how well this is all going to work out though.

    • Kentauroi says:

      Well it was mentioned, but this is a fairly big expansion to it, on top of the boatload of other content already promised. It still worries me since at this point in time we’ve heard tons of talk, but seen relatively little. I want to be optimistic for it, I want to take my Aurora out for a test drive and have a blast, but this game sounds almost too good to be true, which makes me very wary based on past experiences.

      Hopefully when this game releases I’ll look back and laugh in relief, but at this point I’m oddly more worried than hyped.

    • Sathure says:

      All of the “Stretch goals” are part of the initial scope of the game. The game itself requires about 22 Million that’s what they are working towards. Initially Roberts was going to get the funds from investors, but due to the success of the kick starter they’ve decided to have the project entirely crowd funded. The design is meant to be modular, they reveal secondary features that have been planned when they feel comfortably with that amount of money they will be able to complete them.

      Obviously yes the game itself is very very ambitious. But surprisingly they’ve delivered on everything they’ve promised up until now and I’ve yet to see a sign that they can’t complete it.

    • Liudeius says:

      You can doubt as much as you want for the initial pitch, but all the stretch goal since the Kickstarter finished (other than a mo-cap studio at $10 million) have been minimal things, which add virtually no content.

      Many of them have been stuff like “free laser pistol/space suit” (which is designed for the game anyway), “players can fly ____ class ships” (Ships which are being made for Squadron 42 anyway), or this, where they already have FPS combat, and already have planets you land on.

      All they need to do is not tick the box that says “disable weapons” on one of their planets, and boom, done. (Slightly more complex than that, but the point is, these stretch goals don’t cost near to $1 million to make, they are just incentives which would make it into the game even without reaching the goal.)

    • Widthwood says:

      There were series of Russian space-sim / exploration / fps games back in nineties, don’t remember what was their name. They were pretty basic, but if they managed to pull it off – then Chris surely could too, especially with modern tools and larger budget.

  9. Maxheadroom says:

    It’ll be interesting to see how the final game stacks up against Elite Dangerous with it’s paltry £1.5 million pot.

    I’ve backed both, so I’m not championing one over the other (unlike a lot of people), but I really want to see what Elite can do with a fraction of the funding.

    • MrThingy says:

      All things considered, I think I’m quite happy with Elite Dangerous being the quieter, less BOO-YA project, as it will free Braben as much as possible from getting silly with things like FPS sections.

      I think Carrier Command just broke my spirit on the whole FPS-where-it-wasn’t-needed-and-sometimes-compulsory front.

    • Prime says:

      Elite seems to be offering the much greater value in that it’s attempting to deeply simulate a living breathing galaxy, while Star Citizen seems to be all about the dude-vs-dude. I find the difference between the pair to be very symbolic of each developer’s native country.

      • LemonScampi says:

        “I find the difference between the pair to be very symbolic of each developer’s native country.”

        Considering David Braben And Christpher Roberts are both from the UK it would seem that your comment makes no sense

        And on the fps sections,Seriously reading all these comments makes me want to facepalm …how hard is it to read up on something you are commenting on before you post….its just ill informed comment after ill informed comment…Fps sections of the game have been planned from the start but now with the bigger funding they can do planetside sections aswell as on ship they have not just shoe horned in game features at random..the whole game has been mapped out from the start as a $20 million game the only difference now is that it can be fully crowdfunded without any investors.

        • derbefrier says:

          lol yeah it seems even the people writing the articles cant be bothered to look up any of this stuff. PC gamer did the exact same thing. Trying to imply they may be going to far with FPS combat when its been planned from the beginning.

        • realitysconcierge says:

          Do you know if achieving these stretch goals moves the release date at all?

          • Baggykiin says:

            It does not. These stretch goals are specifically chosen to have a low impact on development cost so that the game won’t require more resources (time, and therefore money) to develop. They’re basically little incentives for people to keep funding the game all the way to the 21 million dollar mark, at which point the developers should be able to finish at least the base game.

            However, if people continue to fund the game once the 21 million dollar mark has been reached (which, right now, looks like is going to happen), Chris Roberts has claimed that all funding goals past that point will introduce much bigger rewards, since they can at that point pour all the additional money acquired by reaching that goal into adding those specific features. There’s no official word about this out yet, but I would assume that those promised features will not be in the game at launch, being added at a later point instead, so the release date doesn’t get pushed forward all the time.

      • derbefrier says:

        yeah pretty much those who want multiplayer will go for Star CItizen and those who just want a single player will go for elite. Those who like both will get both i guess. Star Citizen will have its single player component though but it will be more like Wing Commander than elite I suspect. The good thing is space fans will have something for everyone soon enough and thats just awesome.

        • SanguineAngel says:

          Yeah, having been a massive huge big large giant fan of BOTH WC and also Elite in the past, I am pretty happy that both games look like they will exist. They sure are different but in a good way. There’s not one right way to make a space sim and as a complex human with a variety if tastes I feel confident in my ability to enjoy both games. I think people who look down their noses at one or the other for the direction they have chosen to go are maybe being a little pompous

    • Werthead says:

      I could be wrong, but I believe that FRONTIER and FIRST ENCOUNTERS were developed on absolutely tiny fractions of the budgets for the WING COMMANDER and PRIVATEER games, so the ratio is probably very similar.

      In addition, ELITE IV is releasing a base game first and then using a combination of sales from that and the crowdfunding to fund iterative expansions, adding things like landing on planets later on. I also believe that ELITE IV is using procedural generation whilst STAR CITIZEN isn’t, or at least not as much, which means that SC needs a lot more money for hand-crafting more things in the game.

      • Widthwood says:

        WC and Privateer both had whole sci-fi movies with Hollywood actors embedded in them. That had to be pretty expensive…

  10. Didden says:

    It took them how many years to release Duke Nukem forever? And that was just doing FPS…

  11. schlusenbach says:

    $21m – play golf in your hangar
    $22m – cycling races on capital ships
    $23m – tennis battle arena

    • SanguineAngel says:

      I would dig a tennis battle arena.

    • MasterDex says:

      $24m – Tron Stadium. Virtual Jeff Bridges.

      • Bhaz0r says:

        $26million The real Jeff Bridges will come to your house and watch Tron with you.

        • gunny1993 says:

          Can we watch True Grit, it was much better.

        • SuicideKing says:

          $30 million – FreeSpace 3 with Half Life 3 as a side quest.

          • staberas says:

            Disclaimer: Not the actual HL3 game, only a mission revolving on finding that mythical artifact on the Planet Gabe N on the Valve Solar System .

          • Jenks says:

            $30.25 million – HL3 side quest written by Jennifer Hepler

  12. Arbodnangle Scrulp says:

    The cost of entry is so low that even my broke-ass chipped in $30 for the barebones.

    As an Eve Online veteran I got value for money from walking around in my hangar. Is Dread Pirate Roberts planning on selling Monocles?

  13. Utsunomiya says:

    So it’ll be like Parkan then?
    Imperial Chronicles were damn good!

  14. Ernesto says:

    Sorry, can’t resist:
    I read these numbers a bit different. Normally ‘m’ in front of a unit means ‘milli’, which means 1/1000. 20 milli-Dollars are quite affordable.
    The capital ‘M’ on the other hand means ‘Mega’, which stands for 1000000. Now that’s a number worth writing about in games journalism…

    So, RPS, get your m’s and M’s straight! (I’m spoiled by science…) ;P

    On topic: It seems like a nice idea to introduce fps people to star citizen.

    • Widthwood says:

      My favorite system is the one used by Eve players – 1000 – k, 1000000 – kk, etc. No ambiguity and proportions are easily visible.

      On topic: It seems they want to repeat great success that was Eve fps game.

      • hotmaildidntwork says:

        Has Dust actually been successful? I haven’t tracked it at all, and my sarcasmometer is unreliable at best.

        • Widthwood says:

          Haven’t played it personally, but I believe current consensus is between “half finished mess with nice ideas” and “not fun to play”

  15. Widthwood says:

    This article left me thinking… Are there really multiple way to stock up on popcorn? The first one would be to get lots of popcorn, the second one.. Umm…

  16. thebigJ_A says:

    You guys realize this is the Titanic being built, right?

    It’ll all end in tears. And Leonardo DiCaprio deaths.

    • aleander says:

      Oh yes we do. I bought the “sinking orchestra” tier. It comes with free popcorn.

  17. Simplisto says:

    Did anyone else fund this only to find out that their system doesn’t support it? :(

  18. Chalk says:

    KEEP IN MIND, that these stretch goals are being revealed.

    What this means is that these goals were already planned for the game, they are merely being revealed at each $1million target.

    As Roberts says in his latest post, from $22 million onwards – stretch goals will take on a new from representing what additional content can be added to the game!

    So planetary FPS was always intended – all goals up to and including $21 million have already been decided upon long ago. Goals are just being revealed to the public incrementally at this stage…

  19. tikey says:

    Almost 20 million and no mention of Mark Hamill.
    I’m thoroughly disappointed.

  20. Iskariot says:

    Such a pity that the excellent Elite Dangerous is so underexposed.
    Their newsletters, of which there are now eleven, show such wonderful developments, such rich ideas and concepts, such great artwork and designs.

    And Braben is one of the few who is actually creating a true to size (milkyway) open space sim as opposed to a limited sector based sim like Space citizen. To me personally that is infinitely more exiting than sector boxes.

    But of course I will play Space Citizen too. I have played most of Roberts’ games and I have no doubt it will be fun. Still, Elite D deserves much more attention than it gets.

    • Liudeius says:

      By the sound of it, they are both sector based.
      The main difference is each of the 115+ systems of SC is hand crafted, while Elite has procedural generation.