Star Citizen is Free to Try for a Week Starting November 23

hbySCsp.png
 
Damn this thread blew up fast! Hopefully 3.3.5 is live when they take it f2p next week. It's really shaping up well. If you are even the slightest bit curious about it try it out... you've got nothing to lose. It's crazy what they have accomplished with it. The scale is impressive.
 
The Arguments generally come from people who really don't want to admit their previous conclusions were wrong and are more likely to double down on their faulty point of view instead of change their stance.

Either way.. no need to argue with someone who's trolling.. on Either side of the fence.
 
I dunno guys, i got in on the kickstarter. I check in from time to time and the progress has been pretty decent. Games playable in the persistent universe and some people like it. Seems to me all the hate is from people who just think its the cool thing to hate on. The game may or may not end up being awesome, it may or may end up sucking goat shit through a straw... Its clearly early access, objectively insanely a poster child for Scope Creep and poor management....

But in the end. Chill out folks, its a game. At least its pretty :)

PS i only paid for the lowest tier kickstarter, im not gonna give them more money for all this crap that can be gotten for playing the game.
 
kju1 said:
It also says something about the level of vitriol some seem to harbor...
Click to expand...

I'd say it's entirely understandable, considering the amount of money that was pulled in, the ridiculous scope creep, QA issues, missed deadlines, and Chris Roberts's own incompetence in the past. That's generally not a good mix for a crowdfunded game.

I'm more inclined towards the cynical side of the debate. Of course, I am not talking about vitriol for the sake of it, but the numerous relevant criticisms that have been laid out on forums such as these. People will complain about the complainers, but if it brings about real changes, then I'm all for it (eg look at Treyarch's response to the negative feedback regarding Black Ops 4).
 
"Free" is a strange word in this context.

The hardware required to make it playable make the cost of the game seem irrelevant.
 
velusip said:
"Free" is a strange word in this context.

The hardware required to make it playable make the cost of the game seem irrelevant.
Click to expand...

You really can't apply that logic at all to anything really. Is a blu-ray disc not really $20 because of the hardware needed to view it?'

Yes, playing the game is free and was worded correctly.
 
Darunion said:
You really can't apply that logic at all to anything really. Is a blu-ray disc not really $20 because of the hardware needed to view it?'

Yes, playing the game is free and was worded correctly.
Click to expand...
Context and sentiment aside, sure. But back on topic, what good is demonstrating a game which requires an expensive computer to play to a plebeian like myself? It's going to run like utter trash on the computers on 90% of those who will try it... "for free". It's just not the right market.
 
When I first heard about SC, as a sci-fi fan, I was hopeful about what would come about. As I learned about the development debacle, I became convinced (after a while) that, indeed, this is similar to a Ponzi scheme.

It smells fraudulent.

But now? Well, crap! Now that it's being offered for free for a week, Ima gonna buy me a Star Cruiser...in PLATINUM! I need to go find my credit card...

/s

If this game ever sees the light of day, it'll be long after the current producer is gone.
 
New update is definitely smoother, it still has a loooooooong way to go to make it a viable long term game. I still don't know how they'll keep it all going at scale without making it subscription based though.

The amount of hardware they'll have to keep online if tens of thousands of people are playing it simultaneously will deplete their remaining (post development) funds pretty quickly. Especially since they've said they'll stop selling ships at some point right before release.....and as that's their only source of income......
 
Eickst said:
New update is definitely smoother, it still has a loooooooong way to go to make it a viable long term game. I still don't know how they'll keep it all going at scale without making it subscription based though.

The amount of hardware they'll have to keep online if tens of thousands of people are playing it simultaneously will deplete their remaining (post development) funds pretty quickly. Especially since they've said they'll stop selling ships at some point right before release.....and as that's their only source of income......
Click to expand...
People will support this game with $$ if it's worth it. I would. I've come in at kickstarter and paid what, $35 I think, so far. I understand this game is massive, needs expensive infrastructure. I'm willing to chip in for that once I can see that the game is what I want to play. Until then my $35 have to be good enough, but if this game becomes what they say it will, I'm happy to pay for maintenance.
 
To be honest my first impression was at launch one of my buddies dound the kick starter FAST and was like
"Hey get in on the ground floor with life time insurance"
I was like,
"When is the game done"
And he said
"Who the he'll knows"

That was more than enough to keep my wallet shut
 
  • Like
Reactions: DocNo
like this
I've been reading about this game for years and still have no idea on what its about or what you do.....
 
You should give free popcorn coupons whenever a starcitizen thread is made. That's good synergy right there.
 
Aireoth said:
Mope54, you are the one slinging insults, let me give you a tip, it doesn't make you a good ambassador for the product, in fact you and many other supports attitudes make me quite concerned that SC should it ever arrive will be nothing more than a toxic shit hole like most MOBA's are.

I'd say those that know better, really should act better.
Click to expand...

Both people in this argument are resorting to personal insults, but Mope54 does have a point. If you are going to say the game is crap without even taking advantage of the free week of flight demos? Well, you're actually the one 'invested' in the game, to borrow an expression. In this case, however, you're invested in its failure. Mope54 could have handled himself better, for sure, and just said something along the lines of 'if you won't play the game, then why should we listen to you that it's crappy?' But he chose to call SilverSilver a blowhard, which opened the door for the whole 'invested' comment.
 
These free trials seem to always happen when I don’t have time to play them. Moving the week this one is taking place but hopefully I’ll get a chance to try it out.
 
SilverSliver said:
Sure it did. The content of EVE at the start is the same as it is now, essentially. You either get to nullsec and do nullsec stuff, or you don't and quit. There is more to do inbetween now, but the majority of the content is essentially the same. Until Star Citizen can show me thousand player engagements, in real time, I'm not going to bite.



I know you are probably, and quite literally, invested but get a grip. Did you download Hello Kitty Online to give it a fair shake?
Click to expand...
I'm closer to the pyramid scheme side than not, but I couldn't give a rats ass about those things. All I care about is the single player game. If they had that (and it was a good game), I'd jump on it. If they got the MMO portion working well, that's just a bonus. That said, I have no confidence that it'll be finished 5 years from now. What's it been 7 or 8 years?
 
they have enough $$ now...they should cut off donations and work with what they have to make a completed game...the more $$ that keeps coming in the more features and engine changes will get added
 
Axehandler said:
So if you see steady improvements and actual work being done...

it's a scam and a pyramid scheme?
Click to expand...

It's not a pyramid scheme, in a pyramid scheme early investors actually win, it is the low level late entries who get scammed. With SC it is the other way around, the earlier you went in, and the more you invested, the bigger looser you are. And I'm saying that as someone who went in full steam ahead at the earliest possible opportunity.

Steady improvements at a snail's pace. Would you praise a builder who lays a few bricks every day, then after an hour of work goes out to create campaign material? And the projected completion of the work is converging to infinity? Especially since he announces an n+1st floor every month?
 
EODetroit said:
Star Citizen - 200M. Destiny - 500M. Which would you rather play? Who is really mis-managing their money?
Click to expand...
Since only one of those is actually playable there is no question here. SC has no narrative, no guidance, no tutorials, no introduction, many of the features are placeholders, or outright pointless. You're thrust into a framework, where you can try out certain gameplay mechanics. That's it. If you enjoy flying aimlessly and walking aimlessly in a space station with nothing to do, then certainly it is the game for you. Oh and enjoy figuring out how to do things, and what things can you even do, since the game is not telling you. No player guidance whatsoever. That's why it is being called a tech demo. That is the very definition of a tech demo. A showreel of technologies, which looks great in a promo video that was condensed and cut together by fanatics who didn't mind wasting days figuring out the features, or by the developers.
For a regular player who expects a real game it is utterly pointless and boring.

And no, I'm not putting you down because you dare liking the tech demo in it's current state. But because you dare say that it is more of a game than destiny. That's as dishonest as dishonesty gets. You might enjoy it more than destiny, but that doesn't make it a game. I enjoy beamng a lot, but I'd never venture to call it a game, not even a husk of one. It is as far away from being a complete game as is star citizen.
 
DF-1 said:
Destiny 500 million yes, for THREE games. and they've already delivered 2 full games.
Click to expand...


For 3 games, AND I would guess as most games, their marketing budget is close to half of that. Activision is known for blowing budgets on marketing. Destiny 1 development + marketing was under 140 million.

GTA V cost 137 million to develop a full game. This is 200 million and growing...
 
They've collected 200 million, we don't know how much they've spent on it. Probably 2 million....that's what I would have done. With a huge fat bonus to the CEO (aka me)
 
velusip said:
Context and sentiment aside, sure. But back on topic, what good is demonstrating a game which requires an expensive computer to play to a plebeian like myself? It's going to run like utter trash on the computers on 90% of those who will try it... "for free". It's just not the right market.
Click to expand...

I dont understand. So if you have a crappy computer, all games should never evolve so that you can always play them? Upgrade instead of complaining
 
Yaka said:
free for a weekend but its not compleate ? sheesh
Click to expand...

It's more to test the build and *hopefully* get more people in to the game. In its current state of play I think bringing more people to play it is a bad idea. It's too buggy and there's not enough to do
 
buggy, still runs like absolute shit even on high end systems, and you still feel like there is nothing to do. Just a bunch of small demos strung together as a "game". :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top