When will Sup Forums admit that they were wrong about this game?

When will Sup Forums admit that they were wrong about this game?

Its shit and it will always be shit

When its released

so basically never.

hasn't this game changed game engine 3 times and hasn't even come out yet?

Sounds promising

Don't you have to pay real money to get ships? Why would Sup Forums be wrong about calling a kickstarter pay to win VR mmorpg?

there has to actually be a game to be wrong about first

you need to go back

You don't have to, you can if you want.

why do cultists defend this shitty tech demo

I bought a starter-level ship, willing to wait a few years for it to come out while I'm active duty.

It started on CryEngine and then switched to Amazon's fork of CryEngine.

I saw the info for it early on, said "sounds interesting, I hope it succeeds". At the same time I was fairly certain they would not be able to deliver on their promises. Then the kickstarter campaign made headlines for generating the most money ever for a video game. Then I didn't hear anything for a long time. Then when I did hear something it was that everything had gone awry and they had already burned through their kickstarter cash.


If I had to bet money on this thing ever becoming a real game I'd bet against it.

I'm just waiting for the inevitable "We ran out of money, so sorry" news.

t. EA

But OP, first there has to be a game to be wrong about

When it comes out and if it's good.

yeah. right.
neckbeards are going to cry like babies if their $1000 ships aren't the best thing in the game and basically unoptanium for normal players.
Roberts is never going to piss off his hardcore bootlicker fanbase by making their $1000 purchases worthless.

People like u and me play for the long game

>an ambitious project that doesn't give a fuck about toasters not being able to run it
>"BUT IT DOESNT RUN ON MUH TOASTER FROM 5 YEARS AGO REEEE"

when the game is released with every feature that was ever announced.

>game that was supposed to release 5 years ago
>doesn't run on 5 year old machines

>anything that isn't 32GB RAM, 1080ti, and PooInteLoo i9s is a toaster
opinion discarded.

Cultist spotted.

even the dev rigs can barely maintain a solid 30fps.

when he delivers on the promises that he used to shake-down fools for over $160 million

even if he does that, the game will be riddled with pay2win and it won't have been worth it

>repackages promises into "3.0 release"
>fails to meet repackaged promises

When was his deadline on 3.0 again? September? How close is he, soyboy?

i haven't bought into it and not planning to until its released, but complaining that it doesn't run on outdated hardware that your typical triple A titles run on is really pathetic. There are a million valid criticisms regarding star citizen but not being able to run smoothly on shit pcs is not one of them.

why do you niggers attack it

i would be really interested to know what their budget is looking like now. like how much of it have they blown through already? can't be cheap running 3 offices across the world and trying to coordinate everything between them. does the release of new ships to buy coincide with them needing another cash injection?

and how do people expect them to merge all these 'modules' together? do you think they will just click together like fucking lego? that whole process will produce bugs that will take another 10 years to fucking resolve lol

the dream will remain a dream.

deadline for 3.0 was last year...

>attack
Star Citizen is a joke. Pointing out the obvious feels like an attack to you because you don't want to face that you've made a mistake.

P
O
N
Z
I

S
C
H
E
M
E

At the rate the development for this game is going, it'll take another 6 years to have fully functional and quest active planets.

>"We're going to get (Alpha 3.0) out at the end of the year - hopefully not on December 19th like last time. We're going to put the full Stanton System in there. It's going to include the major planets; ArcCorp, Hurston, Microtech, the floating areas around Crusader. There's going to be a whole bunch of space stations, moons and asteroid belts. I think we've got like over a dozen moons in there or something."

Scam citizen

Because you won't stop shilling it and sucking off the devs every opportunity you get.

>implying it isn't one of you who made this thread

>One of you
>Othering people that don't support you scam.

See
I guess being an unoptimized piece of shit that memory hogs out the ass is "ambitious." Glad I was able to play this giant nothing game for free off of a friend who fell for it to see how shit it was.

Post yfw SC gets released.

...

>25-30fps
>32GB RAM
>"looks promising"

>mfw I didn't fall for this shitty game.

>tfw a friend bought you the game
>if it does release it get to play it for free
>if it doesn't nothing was lost

It's not a game, it's a PR stunt. The playable random shit they released is absolute garbage compared to all the stuff they promised. There's nothing positive to be said until they actually release anything good.

>Sounds promising
>Runs worse than a Switch game

the fps problems are network based not client based, people who think stuffing more ram and videocards into their computer will raise the fps are fucking idiots.
SC runs poorly because of inherent issues with cryengine which CIG has been trying to fix since the get-go.

>fps problems are not client based
is this damage control? how would that have any impact on the game struggling to render the game.

Wait, did it finally get a release?

because the engine they picked was never suited for what they want to do with it.

because cryengine wasn't built for this. it has a strange quirk where each new player makes the gun run that much worse. you can have a dozen big ships on screen in SP and have no framerate issues but if you join an empty map with 29 other players your fps will tank. its the main reason why SC runs bad and whether or not cig can fix it decides if this game dies or not.

Should have built their own in game engine for their specific needs. They got Cryengine cause of its graphics, then when it wasn't working they hired exCryengine engineers, then when that wasn't working, they scrapped it and got a different model of cryengine called lumberyard or something like that, last time I read the news.

lumberyard is just cryengine except with amazon updates
they just shifted the guy they pay to or the guy they get benefits from

I know cryengine isn't ideal but it still doesn't make any sense to blame the performance on the networking I don't remember crysis multiplayer having any such problem
physics related syncing problems but it doesn't explain the abysmal performance

just compare singleplayer performance compared to multiplayer performance with the same amount of ships on-screen
60 fps vs 20 fps

>should've built their own engine
if they could have foreseen they were getting that much money I'm sure they would've went for it

Me and a bud are gonna be cruising with a Freelancer.

>I don't remember crysis multiplayer having any such problem

Physics strains a game engine because it has to calculate how a weapon will fall, where it will fall and how fast it will fall. It isn't merely like COD where weapons only have 2 different ways to fall giving the illusion of physics. There is a reason why very, very few modern games make use of physics. Physics is also one of the main reason The Last Guardian took forever to release, because coding the physics to work on a PS3's CELLPOWER was an absolute nightmare.

The bugs present in the Last Guardian are the same type of bugs present in Star Citizen, all physics based.

>but it doesn't explain the abysmal performance
yes it does. watch the devlogs, they talk about it in depth.
but of course you wont because you don't care enough.