Take To The Stars With Star Citizen’s Free Fly Week

Star Citizen [official site] is an ambitious game inciting a fair share of both awe and controversy. The space sim has smashed crowdfunding records, raising over $100 million, and those numbers continue to climb three years later although the game’s is still in alpha. Star Citizen promises a lot, including ultra-powerful, as of yet imaginary, spaceships that cost thousands of dollars. The game’s future is still uncertain but now you can see for yourself what it’s like at this very moment.

Developers Cloud Imperium Games have launched another “Free Fly” trial, letting everyone blast off and rocket around for free until July 22nd.

To gain access, you’ll have to go here to create an account, enter the promo code SUMMERFREEFLY2016, and download the game. Easy peasy.

Star Citizen is currently still in alpha version 2.4.1. The latest version introduced the persistent universe, meaning all of the progress you make will be linked to your account every time you log back in. This early version of the game is fragmented into smaller sections including the mini universe, a social hub, and an arena mode. RSI says players will get to test out the Mustang Beta, Sabre, and F7C Hornet fighter ships.

Sponsored links by Taboola

More from the web

From this site


  1. The Ultimate Clone of The Ultimate Warrior says:

    Hopefully this clears up some misconceptions about the game. People seem so determined to interpret every last thing about this game as confirmation that the entire thing is some sort of impractically elaborate con. A con that somehow involved hiring developers across 5 different studios, releasing working game modules to the public, giving daily updates (including videos detailing the fake bugs being solved in this fake game) into the development of this clearly fake game and even making cutscenes using life model decoys of famous actors. Among other things.

    I’m sure anti-christ Chris Roberts is smiling away on that private island right now.

    • Chalky says:

      CIG have demonstrated very aptly that you can have a vast number of developers and burn through millions of dollars without producing anything worthy of being called a game.

      So yeah, I agree that it’s good that they do these “free fly” weekends since everyone can see that all you’ve got behind literally thousands of dollars is a buggy flight sim with about an hour of content that could be classed as “playable”.

      Everyone should have a go and marvel at how little they’ve produced despite having 2 additional years and 100 million dollars of additional funding on top of what they originally needed when they promised to release in the game in 2014.

      The next self imposed release date is “2016” for the first chapter of the single player portion of the game (after having cancelled the standalone FPS module). I look forward to this deadline passing without so much as an apology, just like all the others.

      • VOAD says:

        Learn what Alpha means then come then provide some educated remarks on a game under development…

    • Jokerme says:

      It’s not a con. It’s a game doomed to fail. That’s what happens when you promise the moon.

      • VOAD says:

        CR never failed to deliverd enjoyable game in all his career, despite the pathetic troll DS who consistently took gamers for idiots since 20 years.

    • aldo_14 says:

      I wouldn’t say it’s a con. I’d say it’s a spectacular example of mismanagement and scope creep (if they even had a defined scope in the first place) which would lead to heads rolling and companies failing in any other field of software development other than games.

      I mean, their original KS goal was what – half a million? And there’s nothing there implying that ‘oh, we’ll need 200 times that in reality’. It reminds me of the focus of a badly managed modding project, where everything iterates continuously and infinitely — like a roadtrip where you stop every 5 minutes to respray the car.

    • milligna says:

      No one ever accused Chris Roberts of running a well-managed con. He’s an incompetent who couldn’t project manage a lemonade stand and people expect him to put out a game when the last one he put out was 20 years ago?

    • ironman Tetsuo says:

      I’d love what was promised to eventually materialise as I’d rather play an awesome game than laugh at other’s misfortune. I tried the last free-weekend demo, loaded up the hanger module and spent half hour chasing my ship as it danced around in front of me, seemingly filled with helium.

      If the game ever comes out I’ll be impressed and glad to pay for a copy but for now it’s still just a pretty balloon filled with hot air

  2. Shadow says:

    Again with the “spaceships that cost thousands of dollars” BS. They’re pledge rewards: if you back the game in various degrees, as a means to thank you they give you a ship. Ships that will otherwise be obtainable through normal means in-game.

    By claiming spaceships cost thousands of dollars, the writer’s implying that a) the purpose of the pledge is to buy a ship, and b) that the only means to get such a ship is meant to be real money. It misses the point and furthers the misunderstanding people have about kickstarting/backing anything.

    You’re not buying nor preordering anything: you’re financing the development of a game, which like any investment entails risks, including that of project failure.

    I normally like RPS’ writing, but this is disingenious or embarrassingly uninformed at best (like parts of the linked article). Star Citizen and RSI have a number of flaws, of course, but a perceived chunk of them come from misinformation like this.

    • Catterbatter says:

      It does say “The game’s future is still uncertain,” which I think was generous.

    • Love Albatross says:

      Maybe if you didn’t add ships to a cart before checking out from their store and paying VAT, you might be able to effectively argue that giving them money is donating rather than the pre ordering it actually is.

    • Antongranis says:

      You give x amount of money, and get y in return. Its a transaction. 1000s of dollars for a digital spaceship in this case.

      It dosent matter what you call it, it dosent change what it is.

      “Why” dosent matter.

      It is still an overpriced digital spaceship.

    • aldo_14 says:

      Goes to website.

      Link – ‘Store’. Hmm, sounds like somewhere that you exchange money for goods.

      ‘Pledge’. Are ships listed under ‘Pledge’? No, it seems not. It’s listed as ‘game package’.

      “A Game Package is required to play Star Citizen. Pick the ship that best fits your play style”

      Well, that sounds a lot like I need to pick a ship to buy. Let’s say I click on a ‘starter pack’ package. Does it say ‘pledge’ on that screen? No. Does it say it’s a donation? No.

      It says ‘Also contains: Star Citizen Digital Download’. Sounds a lot like… buying a game to me.

      Doesn’t say anything about ‘game may never be finished’, or warn of risk. So it’s either a shop selling spaceships at up to $11000, or it’s highly disingenuous by trying to appear like a shop rather than state any payment is at risk of being for nothing.

    • LacSlyer says:

      The problem is interpretation. You’re actually misinterpreting the author hear by assuming she meant what you believed he meant, regardless of no evidence suggesting that being the case. Just because you assume that doesn’t equate to the original intention being to mislead at all. In fact it more suggests you have a bias to defend the game.

      I’m very much a proponent of dealing with people who provide misinformation (which, not to get preachy, to me is absolutely ridiculous in the information age we live in where you can literally google something in 30 seconds to find the facts), regardless of what their intent is, but there’s nothing to misinterpret here. Do ships cost that much money? Yes. Did she suggest anything more on that subject? No, you insinuated that she was but there was literally no other information provided from her opinion other than the cost of the ships.

    • sethendal says:

      It’s a pre-order transaction with an included access to Alpha/beta with optional, tiered paywalls for better ships and equipment.

      You can call a steak a tomato all you want but don’t be surprised when the vegan you serve it to wants to return it for what they ordered.

      As well, DukeNukemForever, Daikatana and hundreds of other games were “Ambitious”. SC’s legacy will be based on what it delivers.

    • DThor says:

      Your post made me go back and re-read the article again, I think you’re being a bit defensive. There’s nothing there which isn’t factually true, in fact I consider it remarkably generous. I doubt (but don’t exclude) that this is a “con”, per se – it’s simply a colossal mismanagement of a project. It’s something that also happens with more traditionally funded games too, but just behind closed doors. What will often happen is before now the money people will have stepped in, there would be a rash of firings, a few key people would be replaced, and there would be a lull in announcements. Or the whole thing would be razed to the ground as a bad idea. Unfortunately this funding model firmly takes away that sort of power from the investors, who are driven by the potential love of a game concept rather than profit. I don’t see investors as saps, so don’t get defensive, it’s just a model that for me personally doesn’t work for big budget games.

    • Shadow says:

      I’ll concede they’re making a mess of communication. More than in a simple crowdfunding phase, the game’s in (very) Early Access right now, with everything that entails and any well-informed gamer should know. The risks were perhaps more evident back when I first chipped in for my Colonel package (2011). I was aware I was funding a project which may not see the light in its entirety.

      I’ll agree they are giving the pledges (they were actually called pledges back then) too much of a ‘purchase’ spin, and that’s going to come around and bite them in the ass sooner or later. I might wager they’ve been recently obscuring the fact there’s risks, much to their detriment, for fear of losing funding.


      “The problem is interpretation. You’re actually misinterpreting the author hear by assuming she meant what you believed he meant, regardless of no evidence suggesting that being the case. Just because you assume that doesn’t equate to the original intention being to mislead at all. In fact it more suggests you have a bias to defend the game.”

      My interpretation is not a problem. Intentional misinformation is one of the possibilities I stated. The other was uninformed journalism, which is what this is if the writer really thinks you’re purchasing anything other than the current version of the game. While they haven’t been straightforward with the risks, RSI has factually stated all ships will be obtainable in-game through in-game means, so it is uninformed to claim any ship costs thousands of dollars.

      Early access to them, right now, perhaps costs that much, but without context, the claim becomes misleading and implies exclusiveness. It’s like saying “2 litres of water cost 1 pound”. Without further information on the subject, it implies there’s no alternative, that you can’t get water any other way.

  3. Spinkick says:

    Is there still going to be an fps to this game?

    • Comco says:

      There’s FPS in the alpha. Right now. Has been there for…must b close to a year by now.

      I do find it funny when people endlessly accuse CIG and Roberts of being able to perform adequate project management to get this game built, but then also go on to attack them about how they’ve – for example – ‘cancelled the FPS module’ (Chalky, in the comments of this article). They cancelled a stand alone module as they ultimately felt it would slow down the development of the game, ironically. Instead, they integrated FPS into the game at the most fundamental level, so that you put away your rifle, walk straight up to your ship, climb inside and fly off. That’s all working in the game right now, including zero-g transitions, etc. It’s created a lot of bugs and issues to be cleaned up, doing that integration, but it’s better to do it early and work on getting it right than trying to cobble it all together at a later date, which would have had to have been done of they’d released a stand alone module. It’s a good example of the way they’re building the game. They’re concentrating on getting systems in place and designed, rather than rushing content into the hands of the players before they are ready or the content is there to back them up (Elite?). Personally, I’d rather see them take the time and get it right. I’m not at all concerned with the future of the game – but that’s probably because I follow every developer update, and therefore know there’s an incredible amount of working going into the game beyond what is seen in the current builds.

      But, whatever – the doubters will continue to doubt and attack the game, regardless of evidence presented. And in the end, regardless of how good the final game is, it will never please everyone and people who seem purely motivated by attacking it will mercilessly have at it for missing features 13, 45 and 62. I couldn’t give a crap, personally. I never projected my desires for the game to scratch every bloody itch I’ve ever had in my 25 years of PC gaming.

      The amount of personal attacks I see leveled at CR these days are quite staggering. It’s tall poppy syndrome, I guess. It’s a shame to me that, when a dev trys to do something genuinely innovative, the PC gaming community appears to be happy to line up to be the first to piss on it. RPS, for example, usually has a great community vibe, but it’s like the air immediately chills by 15 degrees whenever SC is even mentioned.

      It’s not that people doubt that CIG can pull the game off. That’s fine. It’s more that people seem to be barracking for it to fail. How is that good for any of us? Whether your a space sim fan, a PC gamer fan or simply a fan of innovation and a hater of the same old crap being made year after year in this industry?

      • aldo_14 says:

        I’d find it more worrying that they’ve taken development of the FPS part in-house, after outsourcing it. Decoupling and encapsulation has been a basic principle of software development – and particularly of maintainable software – for an eternity, and being unable to determine whether a key part of your system can or cannot be developed independently indicates some pretty fundamental failures. Almost, I suggest, like they hadn’t decided on how things would integrate beyond ‘we need an FPS bit’ and only later decided it needed to be seamless.

  4. aircool says:

    Meh… When’s No Man’s Sky coming out?

    • xGryfter says:

      24 agonizingly long days.

      • Jediben says:

        Which is 21 agonising days longer than the gameplay will last.

        • Antongranis says:

          Its not fair to judge a game before it is out. Dont be arrogant.

          • Hidoshi says:

            I just want to say a heartfelt thanks for a great laugh this morning!

          • P.Funk says:

            Really, because its apparently fair to be hyped for a game before it comes out.

    • tonicer says:

      That is going to be garbage because of it’s procedurally generated galaxy and it’s multiplatform.

  5. The Ultimate Clone of The Ultimate Warrior says:

    Okay, I’m not going to defend some of the admittedly valid criticism about the game. I will say however that at one point I felt very negative about the game. The same as many of you. But after I loaded up the mini-PU module during one of the free flights I soon changed my mind. At least give that a go. I could walk out of my room, space walk outside the space station towards my ship, Get in the ship and all the kibble around the cockpit worked. Everything hummed and hissed and spewed questionable gasses. Everything felt tactile in a way I haven’t seen since Firefly or the original Mass Effect. I felt so tiny and that was so cool.

    You can get out of your ship in the middle of space and just float around taking in the beauty of the void. Then someone in a frigate blew me up.

    To me my imagination has been fired up by this game. Star Citizen is the game I always wanted to play as a kid. Yes, it’s taking ages to do, maybe you people are right and it won’t even come out. I hope not. I pledged what I could afford to loose but I really, really hope this game lives up to it’s potential.

    • milligna says:

      you dreamed of playing a buggy Crysis mod as a kid? The animations are terrible, the flight model is trash, the FPS component is rudimentary…

      You need better dreams.

      • The Ultimate Clone of The Ultimate Warrior says:

        There’s no need to get snippy. I quite like the flight model and FPS mechanics. We can agree to disagree or you can regale me with more internet hate. I’ve clearly stuck a nerve.

        • 2Ben says:

          It’s funny how people keep clamoring about the lack of ambition and originality of games, yet keep on buying CoD clones and spitting on developers who actually try to do something different.
          And of course, the edgy feeling of being oh so cynical, talking about incompetence here and there, as if themselves had done anything even remotely comparable.
          What a bunch of fuckers, really.

          • Beefenstein says:

            You appears to have a Venn diagram which shows that ‘cynical internet posters’ and ‘people who buy COD’ cross over almost perfectly. May I see it?

          • subedii says:

            Well it’s not a Venn diagram but there was that time that…

            link to kotaku.com

          • 2Ben says:

            Lol, yes indeed. Anyway, haters gonna hate. It’s just so cool to show your superiority by spitting on everything.
            It’s just the weak position though. They’re trying to do something very, very difficult, that hasn’t been seen before. Risk is very high, everybody’s aware of it. Now either you think this dream is worth trying, succeed or not, and you help any way you can,. either you don’t care, and, you know, just focus on something else.
            Actively trying to add difficulty, if only by sapping morale, to an already incredibly difficult project is just chasing the ambulance, a mark of pettiness and weakness.
            Backers, particularly high-rollers like me, are acutely aware of the risk. We usually are on the older side of the gamer’s scale and have disposable income. As we have actual real-life experience, as opposed to wanker goons in their basement, we know what achieving something means, and what it takes. We also know what risk means.
            I’m sorry if you can’t afford a few thousand dollars of disposable income. Perhaps if you actually tried to create something rather than trying to be edgy, you would have.

          • P.Funk says:

            Its just oh so convenient, not to mention obnoxious, to lump all the critics and cynics into the mold of hipster contrarian.

            Maybe some people are legitimately cynical about the messianic level of hype. The game builds its image up, its not just the community that’s doing it. Its a master class in modern marketing.

          • 2Ben says:

            Valid criticism is one thing. Banging around terms like scam, con, incompetence etc. is another. So is calling backers idiots because they want, and can afford, to support a dream, however difficult.
            I do agree that they have a very efficient marketing, it works very well, but it just wouldn’t be enough by itself. They push the envelop in nearly every way.
            Will it be the be-all, end-all game of the century? Probably not. But damn if it won’t pave the way to really great things. And we’ll have helped that, if anything.

  6. montorsi says:

    Hah, “is an ambitious game” is the most charitable of descriptions. I would download it for the spectacle but I have better things to do than humor this trainwreck.

  7. milligna says:

    It’s amazing they do these free fly weeks considering the hideous state the game is in with the tutorial disabled.

  8. sethendal says:

    I’ve no ill will to Star Citizen as I backed it but right now, it’s more or less a very poorly optimized, overly convoluted, mundane tech demo.

    • Beefenstein says:

      I suspect there are plenty of people with ill will for SC BECAUSE they backed it.

      • cutechao999 says:

        I backed, I have no ill will. I was smart enough back in 2012 to realize that they were reaching for a very big scope, bigger than anything before, and that there was no way they were going to make their original deadline, but I backed because I knew that it was a long shot, but at the time I was excited at the prospect of watching them try. The people who are upset because they didn’t know what they were getting into shouldn’t have backed if they weren’t going to think about what they were doing.

  9. Booker says:

    This is probably their reaction to the recent debacle with the returned money. link to rockpapershotgun.com

    Or was this announced before?

    • shocked says:

      They had several ‘free’ weeks before, so that’s probably not connected.

  10. Kinsky says:

    Seems like any time people discuss Star Citizen, it’s always either ten paragraphs of Enlightened Apology or furious, bitter hatred. Is there anyone on the internet that’s actually ambivalent about this game?

    • shocked says:

      I think the funding and development of SC raises a lot of ethical questions and that’s why it’s hard to keep an open mind about it.

    • Zychotous says:

      Me. Whenever I think about Star Citizen I always think “This could be really cool if they pull it off or ever release it” then I stop thinking about Star Citizen. When they did the last Fly Free event I was curious and decided to check it out. My thoughts on it remain the same.

    • Llewyn says:

      It’s inevitable that comment threats will be dominated by people with a vested interest, whether real or self-appointed, in the outcome. I’d imagine the vast majority of us are pretty much passive spectators.

      Peronally I hope it eventually turns out to be a big creative success to follow the apparent commercial one, but then I tend to hope that about everything; good games are good for all of us, whether they’re things we especially want or not. There was no way I’d back that with crowdfunding cash for Chris Roberts (or David Braben) though!

    • Cropduster says:

      I’m pretty ambivalent honestly, I like the trappings of space sims, but not the glorified flight sim bit, so I’ll just be playing Eve.

      But I must admit I am transfixed by all the anger and drama from both sides, from both doomsayers and true believers. It’s been a riot and I’ve thoroughly enjoyed it. Something about the dream of a current-gen space game has frothing balls of rage and contempt (No Mans Sky was similar but it’s calmed down recently) and I can’t stop reading despite this not being a project I care much about either way.

    • phelix says:

      I’m 98% ambivalent. And what the other people replying to you are saying is true – the ambivalents rarely speak out, or their voices are quickly drowned out by the more polarised participants. I only speak out because you asked.
      Not sure how many kinds of ambivalent there are, but my kind is very much the ‘wait-and-see’ variety. I will form a final opinion on this game if it’s either released or cancelled (or stuffed into the fridge forever…).
      It very much looks like a game I want to play, except I cannot find the motivation to actually get excited about it. Too many alarm bells regarding its development. Contrarywise, I am hesitant to criticise precisely because it is in active development (all coherency of that development aside).

    • Zenicetus says:

      There is another middle ground between Enlightened Apology and Bitter Hatred besides “ambivalent,” and that would be “skeptical.” Maybe that’s a little more negative than completely neutral, but still a long way from bitter hatred.

      I see a lot of well-earned skepticism in online comments about SC. Considering Chris Roberts’ history in the biz, the (arguably) exploitative ship funding model, and the incredible feature creep of this project, I don’t think that has to be defended.

      I’m keeping an eye on SC because I love cockpit-level space sims, but I’m also seeing a potential train wreck here, so I’m staying in the skeptical camp until they prove they can pull this off. Also I’m not a fan of MMORPGs, so my main interest is in whether the singleplayer story game ever gets finished and is fun to play.

    • FireStorm1010 says:

      I am a hopefull sceptic too. I loved both Roberts space sim games in past, and they were the only one to create space sims that I enjoyed that much. So i certainly would like this to happen. On other hand from what i read, Chris Roberts past projects including my beloved games, all had some sort of drama with overreaching, delays etc. So obviously Roberts may have the sould to create great space sims, but it seems his management skills arent that good. And the feature creep was insane.
      So we shall live and see. I wish them the best. Btw im more in insterested in squadron 41 single player then the mmorpg game.

    • P.Funk says:

      Well I’m absolutely not ambivalent about my feelings on how the game has marketed itself and its business model. Its properly exploited the nature of this most poor of consumer sub units in our economy.

      I feel this way regardless about how well the title turns out. I loved Freelancer and I would love to see this concept take off. That doesn’t preclude me from being totally put off by how they conduct their business.

  11. Danny says:

    Someon else mentioned it already, but it’s funny to see how many people are so eager to burn this game – and it’s creator – to the ground. I’m probably not going to play it as it’s not my cup of tea, but I applaud them for doing something you don’t see everyday.

    When I grew up every month I received a local magazine about PC games. Most of the games described did something new in their genre or at least promised features that made you anticipate the game. SC would fit right in, and I can forgive poor time-management when you’re dabbling into new territory as a studio.

    The only thing that I’m against is the buying extremely expensive spaceships years before release. But then again, you can’t always protect people from themselves.

  12. Premium User Badge

    Ninja Dodo says:

    I backed this on Kickstarter originally and made a few small additional pledges later for some bonus stuff (and to support development) and personally I’ve already got my money’s worth simply from the entertainment of watching the game being built and playing around a bit with the early alpha.

    I am concerned about the ever expanding scope and while I think there’s a good chance of them shipping a solid entertaining game eventually I’m not sure it can ever live up to the expectations that people have built up around it. I’m a little surprised it has taken this long to get the first version of singleplayer out the door but I expect with the ever expanding scope and detail they feel the need to make it really special. First impressions and all. That and some of the core systems have only come together recently.

    Last time I tried the Crusader alpha it was still pretty janky but you could definitely see the potential. Still looking forward to seeing how it turns out.

    Side note: people should not give money to crowdfunding that they’re not prepared to lose.

  13. birdhill50 says:

    With over $100 million of funding a cure for cancer would have been closer than this game getting finished should they have used the money for research instead.

  14. IvayloK says:

    My impressions: 31 GB download. OK, sure why not. Loaded home screen. Clicked around (I have seen no tutorials or any how-tos).

    Loaded hangar, my character was spinning around and looking down all the time. Got dizze. Clicked some other stuff, got to a room with 5 or 6 other people who were jerkily moving around with terrible animations.

    Reaction was – I have no idea what I am doing. This is not yet a game experience that is out of eariliest alpha stages.

    Uninstalled, will try again when there is an actual game.

  15. Killy_V says:

    I tried the freefly a few months ago. First, I had to download something like 28Go, it took a few days, but i was really excited to try this game.

    When I completed the installation, I looked at the option and key configuration, and I was quite pleased. So many things !

    Then I tried it. And it was a WTF moment. Nothing to do, nothing but a station and a few asteroids. I tried to move my ship, controls were utterly basics. Can’t remember if I had guns. FPS count was bad (970).

    I was pretty pissed off, wandered around for an hour or so ‘in the vast nothingness of SC’, then decided to uninstall it.

    Actually, it reminds me of Elite Dangerous, lots of promises of space sims, I remember how everybody was hyped on how promising those two games were.

    And finally just a loss of time. We have much better games to play.

    As an Ex EVE player, I’d love to feel again those few seconds after the rather long EVE tutorial, when I got out of a station to see hundreds and hundreds of ships -actual players !-, local chat busy with WTS calls. A living world. SC and ED are total disappointments atm.

    • Leafcutter says:

      I’d like to give it a try…

      Does anyone know how this 30 odd gig is made up?

    • Det. Bullock says:

      Eve is meant to be a MMO in the first place, E:D and SC are instead largely multiplayer versions of the first Elite or Privateer, E:D in particular was meant to have offline single player at first but they scrapped it for some reason.

      • nim.was.taken says:

        The ironic thing is that EVE was designed to be a sort’ve mash-up of Elite and Ultima Online. Now obviously the main issue with EVE is that, as with any game that allows FFA-PVP, it’s a bit of a murderous hellscape, especially for new players. Braben has come out and said that he feels that EVE is a “reimplementation of the 1980s game, not its true successor,” which isn’t terribly surprising given that he feels like he owns Elite. But I believe that what EVE has managed to accomplish is create a virtual world that feels real. In my opinion, ED has fallen short of that mark. So in a lot of ways SC is my last great hope. I wish the developers all the luck in the world because I would much rather play a fantastic game than laugh at misfortune of others.


  16. Gibs says:

    Will RPS have the guts to try it and make an article about the current state of the game?


  17. Leafcutter says:

    This looks promissing as a new spece adventure game.

    link to everspace-game.com

  18. D1E says:

    I would love to see deep, thoroughly-researched investigative journalism articles on CIG/RSI and Star Citizen. There are multiple important and relevant stories that could come from this – not least of which is the likely failure of a $117 million dollar “crowdfunded” project, the (mis)management, the delays, Chris Roberts’ promises, the toxic community, the backer’s impossible dreams, etc.

    • FireStorm1010 says:

      I think it shoudl wait till the game is realeased or the company files for bankruptcy. We dont know what result will be.

  19. Titler says:

    Look; No one is against dreamers. The problem with crowd-sourcing game development is that it encourages dreams, but creates mediocrity. Because as long as the dreamer keeps dreaming, the financially and emotionally invested keep throwing money at them and don’t demand quality. Indeed, they’re often so invested, they spend too much of their own time fighting online to claim that the game already is quality, and you’re not allowed to criticize…

    But true quality comes from listening to actual, informed criticism and improving your work; Crowd sourced games are the equivalent of Modern Art, so focused upon telling the audience that you are smart, you are special, that if you think this collection of colored squares is genius then of course it is, and of course I’m a genius artist… Instead of earning praise from actually being brilliant, you just end up with simplistic, content free rubbish.

    I have no opinion on Star Citizen, because I’ve never played it, and didn’t get into the hype; but I was deeply, deeply disappointed by my only attempt to support another once visionary designer in Lord British’s Shroud of the Avatar; a game which one of my own friends, using similar store bought Unity assets, is already able to produce a world that looks better and almost identical gameplay without making the ridiculous mistakes that would have been filtered out by not listening to insane Whales. Whales who in turn have literally made the game worse for every other player because they demanded actual gameplay be locked off for others, so they could continue to feel special from throwing more and more money at the game. To the point that people with $20,000 and even $60,000 investments feel alienated by the game.

    You aren’t a supporter of the games industry by suspending critical facilities. You don’t help dreams come true by ignoring when every one else’s dreams are being trampled; because if they don’t have to pay attention to them, what power do you have to get them to follow your own, or even implement their dreams? Game’s companies are not your friend, no matter how much pleasure they’ve given you in the past. Because behind every happy memory was a hard assed suit wearer, one you never saw, who put their foot down and cracked a whip and forced the dreamers to reign it in a bit and do the actual practical work. Now you’re the one holding the financial whip. You are doing the dreamers no favours by withholding it even when they run off with $100,000,000… demand realised quality, not dreams

  20. Dread says:

    Here is my perspective from somebody who happily noted the Kickstarter 4 years ago and didn’t follow the game at all.

    I can only say: What?
    This game appears to be a delusion of grandeur. What did they do in those four years? Design ships to earn money?

    I start by looking at the options menu, graphics low, medium, high. Wow, great variety, this is a pc game, right? So I set it to high, to see how my machine handles it (GTX 1070), then I enter the universe. I’m greeted by the back of the head of some other guy, a poorly textured head. No tutorial, no information, I stumble into the city. Looks good, apart from some gnarly textures, framerate all over the place, usually 60, but dipping as low as 20. City appears to be be utterly dead. I can enter a weapons shop and look at stuff I can’t afford, I can buy some pointless clothes. No NPC talks or even does anything at all. I can drive a buggy in a tiny area. Nowhere to buy a ship, after asking chat, I’m informed the only way to fly is to do a holo simulation.
    Which is just a passable flight simulator with barely any options. I downloaded 24GB to walk through a lifeless city and do a race and a defense mission.

    This is what they have to show after four years of development? Yet, they appear to add more and more new features. I thought, this was a space simulator, why does it need an fps component? Why does it need a ridiculously large planet side city?

    Elite: Dangerous delivers far more than Star Citizen with less money and less development time, I’m absolutely baffled.

    • cutechao999 says:

      The scope is not even comparable between the two. Right now it delivers more because the current public build is way early alpha. You can have issue with the fact that they’re still in early alpha even after so much time, but apparently they aren’t pushing their latest builds anymore and they have much more impressive and logical products of the time in internal builds. Why they’re not showing that is beyond me, they are really bad at PR. Really really bad.

  21. cutechao999 says:

    The fact that most of the people who vilify the game and its creators are not going to have their mind changed by a way early alpha demo, and aren’t going to educate themselves on the game, leads me to wonder why they even bother with these free flights. I can understand if they had a solid cohesive milestone, but the state of the game right now only strengthens the opposition. I don’t think its warranted, we know that they have better more impressive builds internally that look more like they’re closer to the finished product, at least part of the product.

    Honestly I feel open development was a mistake for CIG and CR. Another mistake is that they keep producing and showing off new ships, when they know that doing that fuels more hate towards the game. I do worry about the game, but I think people on both extremes are blind morons.