Hacker News Reader

Comment by scrollaway | Hacker News Reader

> You're praising them for being developers, rather than actually making anything finished

This is a developer forum more than a gaming forum, so I think it's appropriate, don't you?

> plenty of cash without ever releasing anything

Come on now. I haven't at all kept up with the game for the past year and half and I can still tell you that they are regularly pushing out content simply because my inbox gets spammed with their content update newsletters.

In fact, the latest email is from 17 hours ago, announcing Lumberyard alongside "Alpha 2.6 with Star Marine", their big FPS patch. Saying they "aren't releasing anything" is disingenuous.

If you're saying they're not releasing anything you want to play, then sure - they haven't released anything I want to play either. It doesn't change anything.

View on HN

I noticed that you've posted many comments in this topic, but I'm answering this one specifically because of your edit. I didn't downvote you here, but I did downvote other comments you made. Since you asked, I hope you'll take a moment to consider why I did it. Based on other comments I read, I don't think I'm alone in my reasons.

It's clear that you are passionate about the game. I appreciate that you are, because as a developer myself, it's really nice to have people who are enthusiastic about the work that you do.

But having said that, your comments as a whole have been defensive. Phrases like "come on now," "these comments are unworthy of Reddit," and calling others' comments disingenuous are fueling the flames. You're making it hard to have a real discussion with you because I don't feel like also ending up on the receiving end of your comments.

I appreciate the feedback. I was honestly more annoyed that some really low effort comments further down weren't being downvoted, but it looks like it shifted.

Star Citizen started development in 2011. They started crowdfunding four years ago. Hell, studios and companies come and go in that timeframe and they still haven't released the full, finished game that they promised their backers would get released two years ago. [1]

People's criticism isn't that they're releasing Alphas. Sure, they have been pretty consistently. It's instead that that's all they've been releasing. There hasn't really been any indication of a coming final release, and timelines keep on being shifted out.

[1]: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen/descri...

I was one of the first few hundred backers for the game, I'm well aware when they started crowdfunding :)

People complaining that they're late, have too much scope creep, aren't releasing good enough content, etc; all these are valid (albeit completely irrelevant to HN) complaints.

But the comments I'm seeing here are essentially just people disliking the game/the company because they're making money "unfairly". I would simply dismiss them as trolls were they not written by regulars and long timers.

Lumberyard being adopted by a AAA studio is huge news and instead of discussing that, people are shitting on the game. Like, what?

I wouldn't really go so far as saying those comments are irrelevant in a topic about the game. Tangentially relevant? Sure, I'll give you that. The topic is about Star Citizen and their engine switch, not about the game not being released. But people are interested in discussing all aspects of the game/company, both good and bad, and a topic that is at least partially relevant is better than, for example, a link about an NTP server costing $500/yr. If it were in that topic, then sure, I'd say irrelevant. :)

I mean, I've seen plenty of tangentially related comments on HN across topics, companies, and products, and people never complain that it's irrelevant to the topic at hand. As long as it has some relevance, it seems to be fine.

Sample Email: "Here's another pretend ship you can buy for a game that isn't remotely done!"

The post I was replying to claims that the game is releasing zero content. I replied with the most readily available example that it in fact is releasing content.

That you are unhappy that they're making money before the game is done is another problem. I don't get why you would be; there's far less chances of the game ever being done if they're not making money than if they are.

I dunno what to tell you. Don't buy the ships? I stopped buying the ships a long time ago, nobody needed to tell me to do that.

Nobody said zero content. The parent comment even mentions the Beta (technically, Alpha,) so it's clear they meant that no finished product is being released.

Yet at this stage other studios with publishers probably have only shown a teaser.

The fault isn't with CIG, the fault is with open develoment in general. It's just not going to work.

I didn't downvote you, but I'm guessing that a community of developers would be especially inclined to resent apologist rhetoric regarding a 70 million dollar software project that can only produce alpha software with no sign of being finished within the decade, especially because so many of us know what it's like to bust our asses on a tight schedule with limited funding.

I think the SC tech does seem impressive, but when compared to a game in a similar vein like Elite Dangerous, which took a lot of well-deserved heat for not quite meeting expectations, yet still managed to produce an overall fun game that engaged the community while it continues to improve, its hard not to feel like SC could be doing more to give the backers something other than tech demos.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com