259
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
259 points (94.5% liked)
Technology
59598 readers
2396 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
How come other ambitious early access type projects don't have this problem.
Beam.ng comes to mind, it's not complete, but the pricing is reasonable, the progress is consistent and plentiful, and the product has been in a very fun engaging state for years and years.
And beam.ng is an incredibly ambitious project aiming for very high performing and accurate solid body physics simulation.
I don't think Star citizen would get nearly the level of hate if they had a more sensical pricing scheme. $45 +$15 for the base game, ok makes sense, but then there are multiple subscription tiers, additional 1 time lifetime versions of the subscription, different shops for different subscription levels, individual ships, insurance, a mobile game like freemium/premium model (earn credits to buy real money stuff), as well as branching the single player and multiplayer experience into standalone products.
A big ambitious game is great, but no amount of tech CEO promises will make the segmented and confusing monetization scheme seem legit. The game has raised half a billion dollars. It has already made more money than 99% of games will ever make. That's enough money to pay 300 people 120k for the 13/14 years the game has been in development. They have the ability to have a large studio that rivals (or beats) large AAA studios in talent, and they have used more time than even the most notorious studios use to develop games.
Ah yes. Promotional ships that sell for $1000s of dollars irl that are only available in limited runs that you get to keep when the game launches into stable release.
Oops, forgot to mention that some of these ships might not ever be available outside of alpha besides for those that already own them. That means new players in stable will encounter ships they'll never be able to own.
Most of my friends that play it say it's a fair trade since you're paying so much for them, but it still feels largely like a scam to me. You could do so such much better for yourself with that kind of money than just owning a digital asset.
Oh and those ships? They're not tradeable to other players afaik.
Edit: This isn't really fine at all and is in fact a P2W mechanic inside a game you already have to pay for up front.
All ships (will be) earnable in-game *¹, the only difference is the insurance. Currently during special events people can buy ships with "Life Time insurance" which won't be a thing in-game.
*¹: Except special editions, which only differ in their paint job, which is totally fine IMO
How is star citizens progress not consistent and plentiful? They are pretty constantly releasing new content. Single player might be behind closed doors but the multiplayer gets all of the upgraded Tech New Missions new planet development new ships. There's a pretty steady flow of new stuff and you only need $40 to get in.
If the only thing you're interested in is the single player then that is unfortunate but it's not as if they've delivered nothing over all this time. There is a game that is playable and has a surprising amount of content that you can go play right now
I didn't say it wasn't, I also was not criticizing its content.