That's what I am worried about. It's everything I've dreamed, excluding
whole planets to explore on foot.

TNG 2.7 is what I'm using for my current FL SP play. Used that one on the Aurora
server which was popular back then. New systems, new races, new ships,
new equipment and new items. And it's also made so it works for SP. :up:

This is exactly why I am apprehensive regarding excitement over this title. Frankly, this all seems too good to be true, and we all know what they say about things that seem so.

This project is not like other developments. This is the project he has been thinking about making for years. The technology was just not available.

That really doesn't mean much though, does it? A lot of projects started off with big ambitions, only to have hosts of features cut once it became clear that neither the budget nor deadline allowed for it.

SC doesn't really have a deadline since they have no obligations to anyone, but the money will run out at some point. And they don't have a publisher they can ask for more (though I seem to recall they had some investors lined up).They explode in your face, teabag your corpse and dance on your grave?

Sometimes they don't though. DCS happened, which was really my wildest flight-sim dream come true. Now if only they would actually release another aircraft...

No, it really doesn't mean much at all. And the graveyard of defunct game projects is filled with ambitious ideas.

I find the lack of timetable to be a detriment in most cases. More often than not, an open schedule allows devs to add feature after feature until the project collapses under it's own weight. I may be wrong in the end in this case, but I think caution should trump excitement at this point.

I'd still say that the first is the most likely scenario here.

Purely statistically, sure. :hmmm:

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt though. It would never have gotten as far as it has if not for the support of its fanbase. They need us as much as we do them in order for it to become a reality.

Well, I think its a good idea. I know from myself, that if Im told to figure out some new ideas, they get better the longer I think about them.

Is a publisher such a great idea? Look at SH5. I know that the devs did NOT want to release, but had to due preasure from the pusblisher....

Never said a publisher was a good idea. It's not even an option in this case; no publisher is willing to take on a space-sim, save perhaps for Deep Silver and they already have the X series.

Not sure what you're referring to with the first part.

You said they didnt have a publisher, so they could not ask for more money - kinda states that its good?

The first part was because you answered my statement
With

There's positives and drawbacks from not having a publisher. More creative freedom, but once the money runs out yer done.

About ideas getting better with time, I'd have to disagree. Many projects went down the drain because of over-complication and feature creep.


I'm not saying that applies to SC though, never did. Like I stated before, Roberts seems to have a keen grasp on what is feasible. There was just a bit of lamenting all those ambitious projects that fell short of the mark.

The more I've been reading about this, the more I doubt that this game will ever see the light of day. Release date being pushed back to 2015; ships likely to change. Sounds like the beginning of the end.

Er... what? There is no release date to be pushed back and the ships are barely out of the first implementation. Most everything else is still in the design phase. Don't know what you've been reading but I think you got something backwards here.

The planned schedule, from what I recall, is the hangar this month, dogfighting end of the year, then some kind of social module halfway through 2014 followed by persistent universe end of 2014. As far as I know there never were plans to have a finished product before 2015.

They are barely a year into development. Most developers don't even show you a bloody screenshot until 2+ years in.

Er....this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Citizen

Emphasis mine. Followed later by this.

Again, emphasis mine.

So, it was pushed back. Maybe I'm not such an idiot after all.

So from December 2014 to 2015? That is your reason to declare this dead on arrival 1 year into development? A change to an expected release date (over a year in the future) of a few months, and possible changes to preliminary ship stats?

I'm still baffled and confused by what this is based on, so I maintain my "Er... what?".

*http://starcitizen.wikia.com/wiki/An...lease_schedule

That was stated back in May. I don't know when the other wiki was composed, but it may as well have been misinterpreted.