• half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    First off, I would never spend that much on a game. Got a $70 starter pack. Nothing more than you would spend on a normal game. Can’t blame cig for playing the monetization game. Either there’s regulations that stops this shit or capitalism goes brr. That’s the world we’ve built.

    As for the game itself; when Star Citizen works there’s nothing like it. A huge space battle followed by a tense zero g boarding action. Taking the cargo and salvage afterwards. Hell, just flying across a solar system and landing on a planet and getting out and walking around – all without a load screen – is something to be experienced.

    To anyone reading this. If you’re the type of person that has the resources and you buy games at ~50-70 price point, do it. Even with all the alpha bullshit. Even with all the easy echo chamber shit posts. There’s some magic happening with SC.

    Plenty of streamers if you’re on the fence. Berks is good if you just want to catch a stream.

    • CptOblivius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can blame CIG for the monetization game, you can blame anyone doing it. Especially when the goal post gets moved over and over and over. When the goal post was placed specifically to increase monetization. I’m glad people like them game at it’s current state, but it’s hard to argue that there arnt some ethical monetization issues at hand.

        • CptOblivius@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          2 games? I was promised one of those games in 2016. The other is starting to resemble a game after a decade, but still not a “game”.

          • Guido Mancipioni@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Nobody was promised anything in 2016. I backed in 2014 with the express knowledge that the pledge was to support the development of two games at whatever pace it took to do it to the standards they stated from the beginning, and not to compromise for the sake of delivering something less than that. They have been very clear from the beginning that it was not going to be a quick release, but a release that upheld the dreams they were putting on paper. THAT’S what you backed, and they have been very clear about that since day 1.

            And the fact that many people have hundreds or thousands of hours in the 'verse at this point tells me it’s plenty of a game at this point for people to have gotten their money’s worth.

            I know i paid less than $100 for my package and have more hours in the game than more than half my stream library, so seems like a game to me… And one that’s been plenty worth my entertainment dollars.

              • Guido Mancipioni@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That was never announced as a solid release date for SQ42. Yes, there was branding on the page that COULD have been interpreted that way, but there was never a statement or announcement saying that was happening. CitizenCon the same year they announced there were delays that were going to prevent what they HOPED would be released in 2016, as is quite common, particularly when the scope of the project changes as much as it did due to stretch goals and increased scope. They then provided a multitude of new tools and platforms for people to understand the behind the scenes and current progress so further miscommunication would hopefully be minimized.