Since this video was made in October 2024 I've found out that the ship team may have potentially gone from around 30 in Oct 2023 to 50+ in Oct 2024. Sounds like they are definitely gearing up to tackle this issue.
I think I am somewhat optimistic with the "lackluster" IAE new ship lineup this year. Every year before they gave us some bombastic new reveal at invictus, and IAE. Some ships are still waiting to be done, alot of other ships are still suffering from the new ship pipeline (my beloved caterpillar, literally made obsolete by the C2 and still awaiting a gold pass). Star citizen is in a race to the finish with SQ42. It HAS to be good, and if its good, it will bring a well earned cash injection. Until then, this game needs a serious dose of polish. I'm optimistic that the dev team will work more on polish now. Or hey, maybe the sky is falling, i dont know lol
0:52 you said there is a list but in video later there is no mention about specifics of which ships has been done and are golden standard aproved and how many are not ... numbers are good, like total ships including unreleased, from which how many are and are not complete with notes of variants... because let's not kid our self... 1 hornet complete means 3 variants complete but it doesn't means they fixed 3 ships it is still 1 ship with failed modularity since it has to be made as fixed variant... is there somewhere a list like this ?
@@SpaceTomato well in that case i'm surprised that such a big company like CIG after 12 years doesn't have any list of completed ships and which are not... seems strange
I think the ship and weapon sounds definitely need to be updated. With many ships you don't get the feeling that you're flying a 100 ton ship, so new engine sounds are needed and when the ship lands, for example, it would be nice if there were sounds depending on the weight, like in a sci-fi film where there are epic sounds when a ship lands.
@@SpaceTomato Audio is so important, especially in such an atmospheric game. It would be nice if every ship manufacturer had a different ship sound that would always change depending on the size and task of the ship, but I know you have to be patient XD thx for the Video!
@@Tentacl They're working on that with the atmospheric flight model, Vtols are going to be way more important in atmosphere, and ships without them will have a limited time that they can hover before the maneuvering thrusters holding them up fail.
Don't worry, this new Gold Standard is the Final Gold Standard. Not like the last Final Gold Standard, or the one before that, but like really, really the Final Gold Standard this time. Promise.
Well daddy promised me a bicycle this Xmas. Not like the last Xmas and the one before that, but like really, really real bicycle this time. If daddy again won't deliver, I will probably grow up with remarkable trust issues, but on the bright side, I will make 300% sure that my kids can never break any promise, or a hint of a promise, or else....
The Stalker is in an even worse state, and that's what all of the original pre-variant Avenger pledges turned into. Not performance-wise, mind you, just all it can do is shoot stuff. It was fine when it at least had ship inventory, but they've cut that out for the sake of some superficial appeal to immersion.
The interior living space could be quite a bit bigger and more features filled; the ship itself is quite large and has plenty of space for them to use now that they're a lot better at making compact spaces.
That sad part is, that even if CIG took everything, every mechanic that they've developed, and got to a fully functional state, your Avenger still wouldn't be complete.
Hands-down the best Star Citizen discussion channel. So many are just reading off the things that get published in comm-link, but you've always got interesting things to talk about outside of those. And it's all so polished! I hope you have a long and shining future at this.
The biggest issue is the lack of support for starter ships. A buddy got into the game this IAE and he had an Aurora from earlier, was fun finding out that you can't even attach a 1SCU box to it because it is borked and not tested by QA.... CIG needs to focus on the new blood because the old one wont keep its wallets open forever. They need to show progress and show confidence... We are nearing the point where keeping this thing in 3.XX is just not acceptable by any means.
I really appreciate that you cover what IS going on with CIG and SC as it happens rather than talk about where it is going. As much as I love to speculate the future of the project and love some other content creators who cover that aspect, it is refreshing and nice to have "The Current News", and you do it very well. "Future News" has become less interesting to me in that I just don't believe CIG the way I used to. I am far more interested in the here and now in regard to CIG. Thank you.
Hey tomato I 100% agree with you on this one. Starter package ships up to say the nomad need to keep up to date every year so that new players have a great experience entering the game.
I think we’re getting to a place where the game system are finalized enough to start doing real gold passes in older ships. With what we’ve got over the past year, everything that is not exploration, refining, or bounty hunting based should be able to get a gold pass that will stick for the long term.
@@daveg1701 I don't agree. Mechanics like engineering and atmosphere might be coming online, but the game still lacks crew permissions, countless MFD quality of life features like sharing info between seats, mobiglass to ship integration... Interfacing with your ship feels barren, and doubly so for any passengers.
@@magniankh Good point, although I think a lot of what you mentioned is "ship software", which can be shared by many ships, with style sheets applied for manufacturer UI differences. They'll need to do things like add doors to security groups and assign roles to consoles, but it generally won't require reworks of the ship layout CAD model, which should help greatly. Now, give me my re-worked Jump 890 please!!
I agree with a lot of what you say in this video, but the one thing i cant wrap my head around is CIGs funding model. They would sell so many starter and starter+ ships if the basic fundamentals worked well and were fun. We dont need more new ships. Update the old ones and put every single programer on getting the basics good. Let the artist and designers keep making concepts, but for the love of all that is good stop putting energy into new ships and make the game more functional. You will sell more if people have a game to play.
You see this every single time someone invited their friends to the game. 1. They try the game during IAE 2. Nothing works and they have a miserable experience 3. They vow to never buy this piece of 🎉🎉🎉 4. Star citizen lost a stream of new players buying ships that are already in the game. Star citizen does not need new ships. It needs a game that works well enough for new players to enter.
One academic publication used social exchange theory to explain the crowd funding model of Star Citizen. As long as the social capital is there based on mutual goals, trust, and understanding, then the product will invite backers. Once they start backing away by minimizing the social engagement, then the money supply will be cut off. So far they have not done that.
ive invested in 2 ships that havent released yet , the Perseus and the Banu merchant man so i hope both get released up to gold standart when they get released in 1280 years .
I have been stating these issues for years. The only solution is to build out the ship team and get the 1.0 released with or without all ships in gold standard. They need an alternative means of income, so ship sales are not the only means. I think base building and crafting might open an option. Even after 1.0 CIG will need money coming in. So licensing their tech may open another revenue stream but that comes with the issue of training up the buyer.
It's easy to hindsight, but difficult to foresight I'm glad that i'm not developing or managing this project, but fwiw SC is a unique and gloriously frustrating journey of colossal proportions, and i love its scope For the fact we have ships that can be used in an evolving space, is awesome and imagination inspiring, and it's those dreams and hopes of all backers that fuel it forward We, the people, are the glue and oil this unique experience, and for better or worse we move forward with CIG on this epic ride Let's try to make it a good one
Your comment on the starter ships is really spot on: the ships are one of the big draws for the game and the starters should be an amazing gateway. Other than maybe the modernized Cutter, all of them are pretty old and underwhelming (except for the currently OP Avenger).
07:51 THe Sabre Peregrine and Firebird were released specifically as variants to the RAVEN (and not the base Sabre) because a super tiny percentage of players own a copy of that highly limited access ship. And CIG needed something to justify constantly upgrading and maintaining a ship that very few players owned (more effort/cost than it's worth) - becaues seemingly CIG was dumb enbough to sign an indefinite contract to lock them out of ever releasing the ship again. So they released the Sabre variants as spinoff designs to the Raven and not the Base so that they could spend time upgrading the Raven along w/ the Firebird and Peregrine with little effort and having a larger player base to apply all 3 versions to - hence justifying the development cost for upgrades upgrades. They did not have this problem w/ the Mustang Omega since it already follows the design of the other 5 variants. Othnerwise the Omega is in the same boat as the Raven (super tiny subset of players have access and otherwise not justifiable to expend resources and money on to maintain long term from a development standpoint).
I think engineering and modularity are the two biggest blockers left in ship development. Once those two are done we should see a lot more reworks. Most of the other gameplay loops like exploration, bounty hunting, data running, medical, personal transport, and repair, really don’t need changes to the ships themselves. They mostly are just new systems or missions. I hope that when SQ42 is released that we can see a lot of work on the backlog CIG has built up.
Also I think we have to talke into account SpaceTomatoe that once Squadron 42 releases more people will focus on star citizen, which while we speak right now they are already doing. That means that everything will be work on faster and speed up on star citizen. More people will be working on it.
Simple. As soon as Squadron gets released and brings in revenue, they can start reworking the older ships. But I doubt it a bit, because of their greedy history.
I wish they basically redo the Starfarer. It's such a nice ship, the idea is great, but the interior... I've heard they designed it as an FPS map, and as looking at it, and using it actively in the game, yeah, it's just a labyrinth for no apparent reason.
I also wish you would have shown an actual list of all the gold standard current but it does make sense if you want this to be ever green not to include it .
Updating the starter ships is definitely one of the most important things. The new Intrepid is a great example I think. It is basically incomparableto any other starter ship. It has decent firing power and working storage (at least as far as I can tell). The aurora or mustang on the other hand basically lack both. If you dont plan on wasting any more money on the game, you wont see a lot of progress with these two ships. The avenger titan is a bit better because you can grind through small delivery stuff and have a bit of firing power They should also deliver on the bare minimum of promised functionality for some bigger ships. I currently have the argo raft and the lack of a tractor beam is completely stupid and makes it a lot worse than it could be. At least we can see a lot of progress on the tech side of the game. The recent tests with meshing and bigger player numbers on the shards looked really promising. I am hoping that once 4.0 hits live they can move more people to developing the actual gameplay and content.
The "gold standard" is an interesting bit. I just wanted a door toggle for the Cutty Red, between the flight deck and the med bay, and they did it in 3.24. Now I just need them to adjust the seat height to get this crossmember out of our direct line of sight. If they manage that, I consider that gold.
Its a very slippery slope that CIG has created, while most of the ships released prior to 3.21 need a gold standard, you have to be able to allocate resources appropriately to be able to realease new content/ships, to keep the backers happy.
One thing I've seen EVERYONE fail to mention is just how big of an impact that maelstrom is going to have on ship building if all I have to do to fully kill your ship is drop your shields and shoot the three little connections on your bridge to detach it (idris being a prime example) then that is a significant problem another one is obviously stuff like the cutty black like DUDE MAJOR problems
Maintaining a playable version that is updated roughly every 3 months is such a colossal waste of time. They have to fix, polish and make systems, mechanics & concepts playable that were never meant to be the final version. Or will indeed be scrapped in total before we get to 1.0. But it is also the mayor reason for the continued funding, so CIG is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
I was talking about this with my friend yesterday, there is a limit to how intricate you can make ships. When a ship gets larger, the detail density will have to decrease (to have SOME frames left), leaving to highly detailed and intricate, lived-in small ships and rather empty and “rushed” looking giant ships. Granted, the Carrack is also rather large, does not kill my performance by nearly as much as the Polaris does, and is also fairly detailed. I truly hope the Polaris is just a case of rushed work.
I thought this would be more about monetization, p2w and balance than tech debt, but great video regardless. They certainly have got challanges ahead, but the direction seems solid.
1:35 I'm not sure what you mean when you say "it would have been a much better time," but if you mean it would have been a better experience for CIG, I disagree entirely. Locating themselves in and among the metrics of typical studios doing typical things with typical outcomes would have made them subject to the typical market forces, because they certainly would not have gotten the backing they got from backers for typicality. Which means they would have gone to the investment marketplace for funding which means they would have gotten the restrictions found there in which means we would have seen the same types of layoffs and cyclic BS for developers and others that we've seen from other studios.
I just think overall the situation for individuals working there and the company itself if they'd been able to release a smaller scale game things would have gone smoother. That absolutely might not have happened, too. Whole bunch of "what ifs", I'm willing to accept we have differing opinions on that, too!
@@PrettyCoolContentDotCom it at least would have made it easier to shop around for other jobs if they needed to move or leave for some reason. They've made some cool stuff, but it probably looks better to somebody who might not know about it to see your prospective employee's last employee had a good release.
Honestly for me the biggest problem is the feeling in atmosphere, i would like to fly a plane, not something able to go up and down at will. And sound must be rewieved.
They need to find a different revenue stream other than new ships. They just keep making the problem worse by adding new ships. Can't they sell things like exclusive clothing, certain hairstyles, make-up, prosthetics, aging sliders, anything character based and thus not as in need of future upgrades?
They’ve recently announced a couple ships the endeavor and the star liner are being moved to post 1.0 with 1.0 feeling at least 3 years away that feels like a huge slap in the face to all those who pledged for those ships.
Star Citizen is gorgeous and once you're inside it really feels like second life but the "game" is kinda boring. Is like going to work at a factory. Very repetitive. On top of the bugs and all, most things in the game are high risk but low reward. Also everything takes forever. To play this game you kind of have to do it for role playing purposes and do it as a space simulation game. Pro tip: If there's a bug such as ,doors not opening or tools not working, just pretend they have a bad connection in the wiring somewhere and try something else. Helps me deal with broken things.
can't wait for the Reclaimer rework, but its so far away :( - interior needs to be fully reworked as there's so much wasted/unused space -drone gameplay needs to be fleshed out -scanning gameplay needs to be in (because i believe the drones are scan/scout if i remember correctly) -[rumor] salvage 2.0 (munching) is gated by Maelstrom. we can hopefully get the og claw back, because the magic claw is... retarded Also Ideally, they should always have 1/3 of their ship team working on bringing older ships up to current standards. And ofc to avoid burnout, this could be a rotating position internally (EX: i believe they have almost 60 dedicated ship designers, each quarter 20 work on an old ship(s), then next quarter if 7 want to remain on old ships, then only 13 new peeps would rotate in). At one point this is how Riot was designing characters, for every new champion, they would go back and update an older one (or just ryze for the 7th time, but i digress)
Prowler: The drop ship that doesn't have the troop dropping mechanic. It's Components are up a lil ladder at the Piolet Cockpit and are too big to be pulled out of the ship. Concept for drop ship. Add to game without the whole drop mechanic. Later add interactable physical components, but put them in the cockpit where they're too big to be taken out of the ship. Don't get me wrong, when the prowler is fully operational and completed. It'll be one of the coolest ships. But atm it's whole identity isn't implemented, and it's quick fix components update aren't loot-able/ interchange-able physically.
It is fascinating that gold from dev design lingo meaning release or 1.0 ready. To a phrase that is used very losely by both devs and players that means "has the latest features that are released". By orginal definition no ship is gold until engineering is in and even then it isnt gold until all the features that it has are ready to be shipped in the final product. *Just got clarification, gold or going gold meant that the game was sent off to the publishers to be made into physical disks.
I would say the problem is that they try to balance an unfinished game without the systems in place to focus in on what a final dmg balance looks like.
"As a studio's first game, it would have been much better if CIG created a finished product ready for commercial release and building on subsequent additions and games from there." Frontier did this with Elite Dangerous, and look how that turned out. A half-assed game with half-assed updates that was so bad it drove a large portion of its players to Star Citizen. I think CIG made the correct choice, taking time to build a game so the pieces will all fit together.
Funny thing is that it's taken Frontier the same amount of time as SC's development to get their act together (ED seems to be in a better position this year), and we don't know how long that's going to last.
Wdym, ed released like a decade ago as it was supposed to be, a modernized elite with mp features. A bunch of the things were in it that way to be able to release and exist as a game. Now granted elite is a space trucking aimulation franchise and wc/privateer was a b movie space opera franchise and sc was and is still advertised as a second life minecraft killer franchise.
Ship redesign needs ship artists not developers who work on core tech (like network tech) or gameplay designers. So I do not think it slows development down significantly.
Purchasable (or maybe even leasable) real estate, once in the game, will not require this kind of "standard" tweaking (I imagine that changes / upgrades to such will be far more efficient) and I'm gonna go on record now to say that real estate sales will eventually dwarf ship sales in pledge income. Then dig a little deeper and imagine player trade orgs bidding for various types of rights to routes or commodities (which would seem inequitable but would encourage piracy and a black market). The possibilities are staggering, really. I wouldn't be too concerned about CIG's liquidity just yet.
If they would have gotten SQ42 out by now they would get a ton of fresh money for the verse but because we have nothing I stop buying anything SC and I'm waiting.
You say that updating ships takes resources away from developing gameplay but every time someone says "make gameplay not ships" in a stream we are told they are two different teams
@@SpaceTomato i think they meant the comment made a little earlier about cosmetics being able to fund the game i think with enough options like props and interior paints/liveries it’s definitely the better option both ethically and for the outside looking in (loved the video btw)
I just melted my ccu Freelancer MIS. It's useless for solo. Even the combat is useless as it's mainly a large battle support ship missile boat where the missles are not even working. With only 100 people on a server, useless. Reverted to my legacy advanced avenger hunter package. Looking at a Intrepid but I wanted the $68 package. Shockingly, thats a warbond...yeah SC just keeps getting worse every year.
To be fair, the ships wouldn't have been nearly as good as they are now if they hadn't continously iterated on them. Yes, it's a massive tech debt now, but if you ask me, it's well worth it.
I am wondering how much gold standard is actually needed I mean maelstrom is gona be required with all ships doesn’t sound like a half and half thing like master modes all require it. With engineering all ships will need it to work as well. It won’t be perfect on all ships. Perfecting the insides and cargo yeah it will need a lot of time and effort.
@@robertchandler2063 I think we'll ships will need working buttons in and outside of the cockpit. Component functionality. And inventory wiring. I think that'd be bare minimum.
Nice, I been thinking alot about this lately. I firmly believe it is high time to stop putting out pointless "new" ships and start focusing on realising the concepts and gold passes. The past 2 years we've had narry a handful of new ships that actually bring anything to the roster. Engineering will be the biggest feature that allows most ships to start getting Gold passes. CIG can totally still retain their revenue with capital ship purchases and even charging for Gold Passes! I don't think these need to be as expensive as new ships but that is still some great insentive where everyone wins.
Even new ships have problems. Polaris for instance. They failed on the basics. Lack of storage outside of using 1SCU creates every is a annoying. I'd expect lockers every where on a ship of her size. Engineering going to be painful if have to run to armoury or hunt for the 1SCU create with a fuse in. I feel the Zeus must of been finished after going off tractor beam placement alone.
Marketing is their biggest push right now. They really don't care about making the game as much. It's more about making more money now. At nearly a Billion Dollars they should be set by now.
Star Citizen needs to have an exploration gameplay mechanic similar to metroid but more robust. Were i can collect specimens and capture animals and transport them. Or something like star trek...idk lol I guess I'm asking for to much
CIG could use some of their time to update older ships instead of develop and sale more and more new ships and leave older ships abandoned with their problems and bugs. If they would keep the older ships more updated people would probably buy them again.
The main thing is, CIG is not giving up and letting go of Star Citizen. Through easy and nearly impossible goals, they keep plugging forward, even if a given patch sets them back. Don't give up on Star Citizen.
Great great video. Thanks! I have a reclaimer and yeah..its very hard to use. Looks great...doesnt really work. I actually think it's not really a 'problem' right now there are so many ships, people will find something that works..If the game worked. Bug free..with Pyro and the mission refactor. People would forgive the ships.
Unfortunately, recent updates give me more reason for concern. Specifically with Maelstrom and more complex ships like my Crucible. Maybe the idea it's nowhere near should be reassuring. New developments give me other reason. So, from a selfish engineering perspective, a kind of flip side. If Pioneer manufacturing can change to drone beams and, 3d printing garages. I'm more than concerned about the actual spelled out webpages for repair gameplay. That they may well be abandoned. The idea we construct things on the ship, as repair. Like a wing, is in doubt for me. Especially with the lack of in depth Maelstrom info. I don't hear much about this tech debt changing now and that worries me more.
Realistically, they will not redesign 99% of existing ships. They will just add components and a few touches here and there, but awfully designed interiors and exteriors will stay that way (take Retaliator as a recent example). So again, realistically, if you want a ship that not just functions according to gold standard, but also has sensible proper looks and interior layout - the only option is to buy newest ships like Cutter or Zeus.
Just 800 million more guys and we can finish it. Here buy another version of a ship that we already have 3 of. Nothing sells like friends having a wallet fight in a video games store. Bob got a Ironclad I need 2. Bob Got 2 Polaris I need 3. How many people do you think are really going to let their ships they bought and paid cash for sit to help fly the big ass ships? Very few I am willing to bet. Also isn't the point of being in a Org. is to have a diverse fleet of ships. I seen a guy bragging about being in a org with 200 memebers and 57 Polaris on the spreadsheet. I mean what is the point of having the spreadsheet if everyone is just going to buy the same ships. Don't get me wrong I thank each and everyopne of you for funding the game for me to play and enjoy. Proud backer since 2016 and even prouder to not be a Concierge yet.
I was hopeful, but you are so far off the mark, my dude. Yes, SC's biggest appeal is the ships, and it's biggest problem is the ships. Not due to the number of developers working on them or the amount of effort being put into them. The problem goes way, way deeper. It's that the ships are their bread and butter, and they have to make more ships to sell to keep pulling in the money that they are hemorrhaging. This results in ships that don't make sense or are poorly balanced or are just generally ill-conceived. This is the only reason they made a "Mark 2" version of the Hornet instead of just updating the existing Hornet. This is the reason they made the ATLS instead of just updating the mechanics of existing tractor beams.
@@KiithnarasAshaa I don't think there being multiple problems means I'm off the mark. This was a video meant to highlight the need for constant updates and the gold standard, not to say that it's the only problem they are dealing with. What you're describing is also an issue best seen in the ROC-DS 😂 But the mark 2 journey has been in the plans for almost the entirety of the project, it's not an update to the old ship it's a new model that fits into the lore for specific reasons, there are references to it dating back to 2015 and it's why that's the only ship that has received that treatment.
@@SpaceTomato Forgive me then for being overly critical. The constant need to gold standard _is_ a problem. I think my position is that the notion of a "gold standard" being a constantly moving target in the first place is a much larger problem. So much about what SC plans to do is still in the concept of plans phase this far in, and it's really frustrating because I, too, was sold on the dream. So much about what the studio puts out feels like there are many different departments that do things without meaningful communication and without being on the same page or having a firm grasp of the larger picture, and speculation abounds as to what that larger picture looks like because it feels like it changes every couple of years. For example, physicalizing cargo is great in concept, but it has made handling cargo vastly more tedious since CIG seem to require it at almost every step. Limiting where and how inventory can be accessed seems like a neat idea, and physicalizing that sounds cool for sure, but now just preparing larger ships for org operations can thirty minutes to an hour with a dozen extra and patently unnecessary steps where before it was five to ten minutes and straightforward. Changes and mechanics are implemented because they look neat at a superficial level without regard or consideration to their knock-on effects to time, engagement, and enjoyment. In summary, it feels like CIG doesn't know what CIG is doing half the time, and they consistently rely on "This next big thing will solve everything!" and it never does or else is always and perpetually Coming Soon. That's kind of how it felt hearing them talk in the IAE 3 day, hoping that quantum boost and crafting will solve the problems of Master Modes. Firstly, they still fail to grasp the geometric problem, but even then, crafting is who knows how long out and quantum boost, while it certainly looks like something SC has needed for a long time, will only slightly mitigate the disaster that Master Modes has been. We said it was terrible back in 3.18 in the experimental AC modes, but they pushed forward with it anyway before they had it in a good state with everything it needed to be a solid experience. Anyway, thanks for reading my TED talk. Obviously I have feelings about this stuff. ; )
The gold standart terminology is the Problem. Why dont say, all ships are getting updates as long the game is online and playable. Like an old 747 still in service. Lets say 30 years+ at least. (Servicegame = serviceships)
You give CIG way too much credit still. Sizes of components were long long known, long before newer ships like the Hornet Mk2s were even built. Yet a lot of those ships don't even have components since their birth, but they should have had them. A good example of the headless CIG chicken is the Starfighter Ion. Climb on top and open the component bays. You will see that the inside texture descriptions don't even match the outside textures. That tells you how rushed some of the ships really are, and in case of the Hornet, which was done so fast that they didn't even put components in. Keep in mind we had physical components since roughly 2019, that's 5 years of ships, and most of them were modeled without. Up to that point they had released about 90 ships, which is a lot, but that also means that over 60 ships that came after should have been with components, and a lot of them aren't or still have problems. And now CIG had the glorious idea that s2 components are the biggest we will be able to handle, and the only reasonable explanation is that they don't want to remodel those big ships to make them compatible with moving them. Are they are not much bigger than s2 components, you can see them right now at IAE. Its just a foul excuse imo. They always had a knot in their brain when it comes to designing ships. There are quite a few design choices where a logical human being just straight up facepalms. And all on the altar of balancing for some reason. I knew for years that this comes back to haunt them. It seems that point in time is finally here. And GS needs to happen for engineering. That is a cornerstone without which engineering doesn't work for the ships that are not.
They could have *perfected the foundations* of the systems on the original Kickstarted ships in a small scale PU. They built this game backwards. Roughly a dozen ships. Get a foundation of final FPS movement. Get a foundation of a final flight model. Get a foundation of a final ship components and power system Get a foundation of an final engineering system. Get a foundation of a final cargo economy between a handful of space stations. Get a foundation of a final docking and hangar system All of that should have been DONE before working on more then 12 ships and planets. Then all future ships could be built on those foundations with *low* risk of needing complete, expensive, reworks.
@@SharpEdgeSoda I know quite a few folks that regret voting for the game to continue expanding back then. I do wonder if Star Citizen would still be relevant today if it has gone with the original design, though. At least a sequel, I'd guess.
It's what he addresses in the video, though. For them to reach that foundational "final" state they (the Devs wanted), they needed time. And for that time, they needed money. With only 12 ships, that money simply would not exist.
I agree in principle that due to the nature of their funding model and player driven marketing, they have needed to put a lot of focus on a good looking game before everything else. I would argue that CIG needs to have an internal whitebox server to playtest actual game mechanics without the veneer of graphic fidelity and polish. The foundations of the game/gameplay in a lot of cases are lacking in detail, complexity, or missing entirely and the sheer spectacle afforded by the insane graphics and ship details I think often hide that fact. Create a test server, no textures, not even full ship models, just cubes and basic placeholders, and figure out what exactly are the game loops and if they're even enjoyable to play. Building the game to the level of graphic detail as they have obviously drives funding, but they're spending a LOT of time and dev hours building these beautiful models on shaky foundations.
@@zarakichigo Probably the biggest example I can think of exxploration. How will that work? What does it include? CIG needed to (and still does) to define what it would look like, what it would encapsulate, and how it would fit with the wider game as well as ships designed for it. Gameplay first, ships 2nd, fidelity 3rd. Everything else comes after.
Since this video was made in October 2024 I've found out that the ship team may have potentially gone from around 30 in Oct 2023 to 50+ in Oct 2024.
Sounds like they are definitely gearing up to tackle this issue.
I think I am somewhat optimistic with the "lackluster" IAE new ship lineup this year. Every year before they gave us some bombastic new reveal at invictus, and IAE. Some ships are still waiting to be done, alot of other ships are still suffering from the new ship pipeline (my beloved caterpillar, literally made obsolete by the C2 and still awaiting a gold pass). Star citizen is in a race to the finish with SQ42. It HAS to be good, and if its good, it will bring a well earned cash injection. Until then, this game needs a serious dose of polish. I'm optimistic that the dev team will work more on polish now. Or hey, maybe the sky is falling, i dont know lol
0:52 you said there is a list but in video later there is no mention about specifics of which ships has been done and are golden standard aproved and how many are not ... numbers are good, like total ships including unreleased, from which how many are and are not complete with notes of variants... because let's not kid our self... 1 hornet complete means 3 variants complete but it doesn't means they fixed 3 ships it is still 1 ship with failed modularity since it has to be made as fixed variant... is there somewhere a list like this ?
@@yashik sorry, there's a lost of what? I haven't compiled any lists of what needs to be updated, but it's basically energy at this moment in time lol
@@SpaceTomato well in that case i'm surprised that such a big company like CIG after 12 years doesn't have any list of completed ships and which are not... seems strange
@@yashik oh. I mean you can find the status of reach list on the website, but I don't have a list of it easy to see all at once
I think the ship and weapon sounds definitely need to be updated. With many ships you don't get the feeling that you're flying a 100 ton ship, so new engine sounds are needed and when the ship lands, for example, it would be nice if there were sounds depending on the weight, like in a sci-fi film where there are epic sounds when a ship lands.
Absolutely. Lots of work to be done in audio. I'm feeling better over the last year about that than I used to, though.
@@SpaceTomato Audio is so important, especially in such an atmospheric game. It would be nice if every ship manufacturer had a different ship sound that would always change depending on the size and task of the ship, but I know you have to be patient XD thx for the Video!
Hover modw should be completely reworked too. Other than the reclaimer all ships feel like they are levitating.
@@Tentacl They're working on that with the atmospheric flight model, Vtols are going to be way more important in atmosphere, and ships without them will have a limited time that they can hover before the maneuvering thrusters holding them up fail.
They should hire whoever did the work on elite dangerous for audio. Incredible incredible audio
I never thought about it, but the fact that starter ships aren't gold standard is kinda mind blowing
I know.Its almost as if they were the first iterations and need to be updated.😮
Don't worry, this new Gold Standard is the Final Gold Standard. Not like the last Final Gold Standard, or the one before that, but like really, really the Final Gold Standard this time. Promise.
The ultimate weapon. The Quantum Server Meshing Gold Standard
It wont be as good as the next gold standard though lol
The 2030s will be the decade of the Titanium standard, and so on.
Well daddy promised me a bicycle this Xmas. Not like the last Xmas and the one before that, but like really, really real bicycle this time.
If daddy again won't deliver, I will probably grow up with remarkable trust issues, but on the bright side, I will make 300% sure that my kids can never break any promise, or a hint of a promise, or else....
0:42 i love how whenever someone talks about a ship needing to be updated a clip of a caterpillar isnt far behind LMAO
I just want my little Avenger Titan to be updated.
Yea im gonna buy a cutter because of this the titan is to old
The Stalker is in an even worse state, and that's what all of the original pre-variant Avenger pledges turned into. Not performance-wise, mind you, just all it can do is shoot stuff. It was fine when it at least had ship inventory, but they've cut that out for the sake of some superficial appeal to immersion.
The interior living space could be quite a bit bigger and more features filled; the ship itself is quite large and has plenty of space for them to use now that they're a lot better at making compact spaces.
The last ships to get updated will be the best. Hope they don't update it soon.
That sad part is, that even if CIG took everything, every mechanic that they've developed, and got to a fully functional state, your Avenger still wouldn't be complete.
The biggest problem is gameplay. Ships in gold standard doesn't matter if the gameplay for those features don't exist.
@GabrielVitor-kq6uj ye, there is nothing to do and no point in doing it.
I'm amazed that after over 10 years they don't have their gameplay loops clearly defined.
@@joshinspace3903 it's taken awhile
12. Amazed? ahahahaha
Even if they are, most everything is subject to change. A lot to hold up to, fall short of.
If you followed development, you wouldn't be amazed and you'd know exactly what, how and why things are developed as they are.
@@Nemoticonenlighten us please
Hands-down the best Star Citizen discussion channel. So many are just reading off the things that get published in comm-link, but you've always got interesting things to talk about outside of those. And it's all so polished! I hope you have a long and shining future at this.
The biggest issue is the lack of support for starter ships. A buddy got into the game this IAE and he had an Aurora from earlier, was fun finding out that you can't even attach a 1SCU box to it because it is borked and not tested by QA.... CIG needs to focus on the new blood because the old one wont keep its wallets open forever. They need to show progress and show confidence... We are nearing the point where keeping this thing in 3.XX is just not acceptable by any means.
I really appreciate that you cover what IS going on with CIG and SC as it happens rather than talk about where it is going.
As much as I love to speculate the future of the project and love some other content creators who cover that aspect, it is refreshing and nice to have "The Current News", and you do it very well.
"Future News" has become less interesting to me in that I just don't believe CIG the way I used to. I am far more interested in the here and now in regard to CIG.
Thank you.
@@capnsquirrel4017 honestly, I love future news! But it's worth covering the current stuff too!
This comment says 1 month ago but the video is 8 hours old. Are you a time traveler?
He covers all of it.
@@alexc9434 it's maybe not just cig doing some marketing moves behind the curtains after all 😆
Hey tomato I 100% agree with you on this one. Starter package ships up to say the nomad need to keep up to date every year so that new players have a great experience entering the game.
@@OutlookJonas the new player experience should be the best you can get in the game!
are you a new player?
can I get an amen?! missions derping out and bugs with ships are 2 biggest causes for ragequitting imho
The 600i rework is what I am waiting for. Last update was over a year and a half ago
I think we’re getting to a place where the game system are finalized enough to start doing real gold passes in older ships. With what we’ve got over the past year, everything that is not exploration, refining, or bounty hunting based should be able to get a gold pass that will stick for the long term.
"I think we’re getting to a place where the game system are finalized enough to start doing real gold passes in older ships." -Backers in 2018
new ships might be getting made with it in mind but Maelstrom would probably need massive amounts of work on ships
Engineering is a major step for that, I think. I hope lol
@@daveg1701 I don't agree. Mechanics like engineering and atmosphere might be coming online, but the game still lacks crew permissions, countless MFD quality of life features like sharing info between seats, mobiglass to ship integration... Interfacing with your ship feels barren, and doubly so for any passengers.
@@magniankh Good point, although I think a lot of what you mentioned is "ship software", which can be shared by many ships, with style sheets applied for manufacturer UI differences. They'll need to do things like add doors to security groups and assign roles to consoles, but it generally won't require reworks of the ship layout CAD model, which should help greatly.
Now, give me my re-worked Jump 890 please!!
Once the game itself is gold standard, I think update planning and progress will be more clear. Here's hoping no more ship retirements soon.
I agree with a lot of what you say in this video, but the one thing i cant wrap my head around is CIGs funding model. They would sell so many starter and starter+ ships if the basic fundamentals worked well and were fun. We dont need more new ships. Update the old ones and put every single programer on getting the basics good. Let the artist and designers keep making concepts, but for the love of all that is good stop putting energy into new ships and make the game more functional. You will sell more if people have a game to play.
You see this every single time someone invited their friends to the game.
1. They try the game during IAE
2. Nothing works and they have a miserable experience
3. They vow to never buy this piece of 🎉🎉🎉
4. Star citizen lost a stream of new players buying ships that are already in the game.
Star citizen does not need new ships. It needs a game that works well enough for new players to enter.
Looking forward to getting my hands on the 600i rework
One academic publication used social exchange theory to explain the crowd funding model of Star Citizen. As long as the social capital is there based on mutual goals, trust, and understanding, then the product will invite backers. Once they start backing away by minimizing the social engagement, then the money supply will be cut off. So far they have not done that.
ive invested in 2 ships that havent released yet , the Perseus and the Banu merchant man so i hope both get released up to gold standart when they get released in 1280 years .
I really hope that with engineering they will be able nail down what ship gold stand will need to be and start to update older ship.
I have been stating these issues for years. The only solution is to build out the ship team and get the 1.0 released with or without all ships in gold standard. They need an alternative means of income, so ship sales are not the only means. I think base building and crafting might open an option. Even after 1.0 CIG will need money coming in. So licensing their tech may open another revenue stream but that comes with the issue of training up the buyer.
It’s a big general point about SC, so much wasted time and money has gone into having to do stuff twice or sometime three of four times
They also seem to cut finished things which just waste money
It's easy to hindsight, but difficult to foresight
I'm glad that i'm not developing or managing this project, but fwiw SC is a unique and gloriously frustrating journey of colossal proportions, and i love its scope
For the fact we have ships that can be used in an evolving space, is awesome and imagination inspiring, and it's those dreams and hopes of all backers that fuel it forward
We, the people, are the glue and oil this unique experience, and for better or worse we move forward with CIG on this epic ride
Let's try to make it a good one
Your comment on the starter ships is really spot on: the ships are one of the big draws for the game and the starters should be an amazing gateway. Other than maybe the modernized Cutter, all of them are pretty old and underwhelming (except for the currently OP Avenger).
Great video and really important topic. This needs to be discussed more.
07:51 THe Sabre Peregrine and Firebird were released specifically as variants to the RAVEN (and not the base Sabre) because a super tiny percentage of players own a copy of that highly limited access ship. And CIG needed something to justify constantly upgrading and maintaining a ship that very few players owned (more effort/cost than it's worth) - becaues seemingly CIG was dumb enbough to sign an indefinite contract to lock them out of ever releasing the ship again. So they released the Sabre variants as spinoff designs to the Raven and not the Base so that they could spend time upgrading the Raven along w/ the Firebird and Peregrine with little effort and having a larger player base to apply all 3 versions to - hence justifying the development cost for upgrades upgrades. They did not have this problem w/ the Mustang Omega since it already follows the design of the other 5 variants. Othnerwise the Omega is in the same boat as the Raven (super tiny subset of players have access and otherwise not justifiable to expend resources and money on to maintain long term from a development standpoint).
Strong argument for keeping the starters up to Gold standard.
@@CraigPaschang at least stuff like the avengers auroras and the stangs there isnt much ship to deal with
I think engineering and modularity are the two biggest blockers left in ship development. Once those two are done we should see a lot more reworks. Most of the other gameplay loops like exploration, bounty hunting, data running, medical, personal transport, and repair, really don’t need changes to the ships themselves. They mostly are just new systems or missions. I hope that when SQ42 is released that we can see a lot of work on the backlog CIG has built up.
Also I think we have to talke into account SpaceTomatoe that once Squadron 42 releases more people will focus on star citizen, which while we speak right now they are already doing. That means that everything will be work on faster and speed up on star citizen. More people will be working on it.
Simple. As soon as Squadron gets released and brings in revenue, they can start reworking the older ships. But I doubt it a bit, because of their greedy history.
I wish they basically redo the Starfarer. It's such a nice ship, the idea is great, but the interior... I've heard they designed it as an FPS map, and as looking at it, and using it actively in the game, yeah, it's just a labyrinth for no apparent reason.
I also wish you would have shown an actual list of all the gold standard current but it does make sense if you want this to be ever green not to include it .
I also don't know where to find that lost right now. Maybe I can put it together over time, but I imagine somebody else is already doing it.
Updating the starter ships is definitely one of the most important things. The new Intrepid is a great example I think. It is basically incomparableto any other starter ship. It has decent firing power and working storage (at least as far as I can tell). The aurora or mustang on the other hand basically lack both. If you dont plan on wasting any more money on the game, you wont see a lot of progress with these two ships. The avenger titan is a bit better because you can grind through small delivery stuff and have a bit of firing power
They should also deliver on the bare minimum of promised functionality for some bigger ships. I currently have the argo raft and the lack of a tractor beam is completely stupid and makes it a lot worse than it could be.
At least we can see a lot of progress on the tech side of the game. The recent tests with meshing and bigger player numbers on the shards looked really promising. I am hoping that once 4.0 hits live they can move more people to developing the actual gameplay and content.
Some I like to see is VR support to return to SC at the same time Pimax Crystal Supper is released. Here’s to dream a little bit bigger.
The "gold standard" is an interesting bit. I just wanted a door toggle for the Cutty Red, between the flight deck and the med bay, and they did it in 3.24. Now I just need them to adjust the seat height to get this crossmember out of our direct line of sight. If they manage that, I consider that gold.
Allowing the flashing lights turn on and off separate the normal lights will make it gold standard.
Great insight and summary. I think there is bright future with gold standard as the changes are coming faster and faster into the game.
Its a very slippery slope that CIG has created, while most of the ships released prior to 3.21 need a gold standard, you have to be able to allocate resources appropriately to be able to realease new content/ships, to keep the backers happy.
I can't wait to see the 600i rework!!
Bad news... we gotta wait. lol
One thing I've seen EVERYONE fail to mention is just how big of an impact that maelstrom is going to have on ship building if all I have to do to fully kill your ship is drop your shields and shoot the three little connections on your bridge to detach it (idris being a prime example) then that is a significant problem another one is obviously stuff like the cutty black like DUDE MAJOR problems
Maintaining a playable version that is updated roughly every 3 months is such a colossal waste of time. They have to fix, polish and make systems, mechanics & concepts playable that were never meant to be the final version. Or will indeed be scrapped in total before we get to 1.0.
But it is also the mayor reason for the continued funding, so CIG is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
I was talking about this with my friend yesterday, there is a limit to how intricate you can make ships. When a ship gets larger, the detail density will have to decrease (to have SOME frames left), leaving to highly detailed and intricate, lived-in small ships and rather empty and “rushed” looking giant ships.
Granted, the Carrack is also rather large, does not kill my performance by nearly as much as the Polaris does, and is also fairly detailed.
I truly hope the Polaris is just a case of rushed work.
Much of this is the game engine showing it's age. Being unable to efficiently perform hidden surface determination/removal.
The progress tracker says they worked on suit lockers in 2022. Are they in game yet?
I thought this would be more about monetization, p2w and balance than tech debt, but great video regardless. They certainly have got challanges ahead, but the direction seems solid.
Hammerhead needs some serious attention. If you blow a hole in it. Most of the ship will vent.
1:35 I'm not sure what you mean when you say "it would have been a much better time," but if you mean it would have been a better experience for CIG, I disagree entirely. Locating themselves in and among the metrics of typical studios doing typical things with typical outcomes would have made them subject to the typical market forces, because they certainly would not have gotten the backing they got from backers for typicality. Which means they would have gone to the investment marketplace for funding which means they would have gotten the restrictions found there in which means we would have seen the same types of layoffs and cyclic BS for developers and others that we've seen from other studios.
I just think overall the situation for individuals working there and the company itself if they'd been able to release a smaller scale game things would have gone smoother.
That absolutely might not have happened, too. Whole bunch of "what ifs", I'm willing to accept we have differing opinions on that, too!
@SpaceTomato fair enough. I guess I agree that the day to day for many would have gone smoother...until it didn't. :)
@@PrettyCoolContentDotCom it at least would have made it easier to shop around for other jobs if they needed to move or leave for some reason. They've made some cool stuff, but it probably looks better to somebody who might not know about it to see your prospective employee's last employee had a good release.
Honestly for me the biggest problem is the feeling in atmosphere, i would like to fly a plane, not something able to go up and down at will. And sound must be rewieved.
They need to find a different revenue stream other than new ships. They just keep making the problem worse by adding new ships. Can't they sell things like exclusive clothing, certain hairstyles, make-up, prosthetics, aging sliders, anything character based and thus not as in need of future upgrades?
Nothing that would bring in nearly as much money
They’ve recently announced a couple ships the endeavor and the star liner are being moved to post 1.0 with 1.0 feeling at least 3 years away that feels like a huge slap in the face to all those who pledged for those ships.
To be fair, CIG had already said that the Endeavor would be one of the last ships that would make its way into the game.
omg when you said it it clicked. This game has so much tech debt it’s insane
Star Citizen is gorgeous and once you're inside it really feels like second life but the "game" is kinda boring. Is like going to work at a factory. Very repetitive.
On top of the bugs and all, most things in the game are high risk but low reward. Also everything takes forever.
To play this game you kind of have to do it for role playing purposes and do it as a space simulation game.
Pro tip: If there's a bug such as ,doors not opening or tools not working, just pretend they have a bad connection in the wiring somewhere and try something else.
Helps me deal with broken things.
can't wait for the Reclaimer rework, but its so far away :(
- interior needs to be fully reworked as there's so much wasted/unused space
-drone gameplay needs to be fleshed out
-scanning gameplay needs to be in (because i believe the drones are scan/scout if i remember correctly)
-[rumor] salvage 2.0 (munching) is gated by Maelstrom. we can hopefully get the og claw back, because the magic claw is... retarded
Also Ideally, they should always have 1/3 of their ship team working on bringing older ships up to current standards. And ofc to avoid burnout, this could be a rotating position internally (EX: i believe they have almost 60 dedicated ship designers, each quarter 20 work on an old ship(s), then next quarter if 7 want to remain on old ships, then only 13 new peeps would rotate in).
At one point this is how Riot was designing characters, for every new champion, they would go back and update an older one (or just ryze for the 7th time, but i digress)
Prowler: The drop ship that doesn't have the troop dropping mechanic. It's Components are up a lil ladder at the Piolet Cockpit and are too big to be pulled out of the ship.
Concept for drop ship.
Add to game without the whole drop mechanic.
Later add interactable physical components, but put them in the cockpit where they're too big to be taken out of the ship.
Don't get me wrong, when the prowler is fully operational and completed. It'll be one of the coolest ships.
But atm it's whole identity isn't implemented, and it's quick fix components update aren't loot-able/ interchange-able physically.
Engineering will be that point.. the Constellation has no Modules to access which would render it unusable if we cannot repair components
It is fascinating that gold from dev design lingo meaning release or 1.0 ready. To a phrase that is used very losely by both devs and players that means "has the latest features that are released".
By orginal definition no ship is gold until engineering is in and even then it isnt gold until all the features that it has are ready to be shipped in the final product.
*Just got clarification, gold or going gold meant that the game was sent off to the publishers to be made into physical disks.
I would say the problem is that they try to balance an unfinished game without the systems in place to focus in on what a final dmg balance looks like.
Great video but that's not LITERALLY putting the cart before the horse tho is it? Isn't that figuratively speaking? Did they switch?
"As a studio's first game, it would have been much better if CIG created a finished product ready for commercial release and building on subsequent additions and games from there."
Frontier did this with Elite Dangerous, and look how that turned out. A half-assed game with half-assed updates that was so bad it drove a large portion of its players to Star Citizen.
I think CIG made the correct choice, taking time to build a game so the pieces will all fit together.
Funny thing is that it's taken Frontier the same amount of time as SC's development to get their act together (ED seems to be in a better position this year), and we don't know how long that's going to last.
@@HeliosExeunt I haven't looked at ED in a while, but every time I have it seems like Frontier just doesn't care about making it a good game.
Wdym, ed released like a decade ago as it was supposed to be, a modernized elite with mp features.
A bunch of the things were in it that way to be able to release and exist as a game. Now granted elite is a space trucking aimulation franchise and wc/privateer was a b movie space opera franchise and sc was and is still advertised as a second life minecraft killer franchise.
I waiting on a Rhodium standard for my Cutlass Black.
Ship redesign needs ship artists not developers who work on core tech (like network tech) or gameplay designers. So I do not think it slows development down significantly.
Purchasable (or maybe even leasable) real estate, once in the game, will not require this kind of "standard" tweaking (I imagine that changes / upgrades to such will be far more efficient) and I'm gonna go on record now to say that real estate sales will eventually dwarf ship sales in pledge income.
Then dig a little deeper and imagine player trade orgs bidding for various types of rights to routes or commodities (which would seem inequitable but would encourage piracy and a black market).
The possibilities are staggering, really.
I wouldn't be too concerned about CIG's liquidity just yet.
If they would have gotten SQ42 out by now they would get a ton of fresh money for the verse but because we have nothing I stop buying anything SC and I'm waiting.
You say that updating ships takes resources away from developing gameplay but every time someone says "make gameplay not ships" in a stream we are told they are two different teams
11:08 lol that’s some copium right there they will not ever stop selling ships
@@robertchandler2063 did you timestamp the wrong place? I don't hear anything about them stopping selling ships there.
@@SpaceTomato i think they meant the comment made a little earlier about cosmetics being able to fund the game
i think with enough options like props and interior paints/liveries it’s definitely the better option both ethically and for the outside looking in
(loved the video btw)
I just melted my ccu Freelancer MIS. It's useless for solo. Even the combat is useless as it's mainly a large battle support ship missile boat where the missles are not even working. With only 100 people on a server, useless. Reverted to my legacy advanced avenger hunter package. Looking at a Intrepid but I wanted the $68 package. Shockingly, thats a warbond...yeah SC just keeps getting worse every year.
I absolutely agree on this
I've never heard anyone speculate about the funding model after 1.0. I don't think selling ships will be it.
I think also selling cosmetics will be the main thing..Paints/skins/furniture.... trick is will it be a $5 paint or a $49.99 for your Cutter ;)
If they are going to build more and more ships, they have to do more and more work. Eventually, the effort to dollars ratio goes asymptotic.
They need a gold pass ship team which does nothing but work on polishing/reworking existing ships.
To be fair, the ships wouldn't have been nearly as good as they are now if they hadn't continously iterated on them. Yes, it's a massive tech debt now, but if you ask me, it's well worth it.
Engineering is not what I'm looking for! I agree with you; I prefer they fix the bugs!
+5 years, atleast
I am wondering how much gold standard is actually needed I mean maelstrom is gona be required with all ships doesn’t sound like a half and half thing like master modes all require it. With engineering all ships will need it to work as well. It won’t be perfect on all ships. Perfecting the insides and cargo yeah it will need a lot of time and effort.
@@robertchandler2063 I think we'll ships will need working buttons in and outside of the cockpit. Component functionality. And inventory wiring. I think that'd be bare minimum.
Yeah buttons and just the layout for cargo …carack fix being the example are required for sure
Nice, I been thinking alot about this lately. I firmly believe it is high time to stop putting out pointless "new" ships and start focusing on realising the concepts and gold passes. The past 2 years we've had narry a handful of new ships that actually bring anything to the roster.
Engineering will be the biggest feature that allows most ships to start getting Gold passes. CIG can totally still retain their revenue with capital ship purchases and even charging for Gold Passes! I don't think these need to be as expensive as new ships but that is still some great insentive where everyone wins.
Even new ships have problems. Polaris for instance. They failed on the basics. Lack of storage outside of using 1SCU creates every is a annoying. I'd expect lockers every where on a ship of her size. Engineering going to be painful if have to run to armoury or hunt for the 1SCU create with a fuse in. I feel the Zeus must of been finished after going off tractor beam placement alone.
Marketing is their biggest push right now. They really don't care about making the game as much. It's more about making more money now. At nearly a Billion Dollars they should be set by now.
A GIANT portion of their money has been spent making SQ42 which produces no income. The biggest problem is bad management.
Star Citizen needs to have an exploration gameplay mechanic similar to metroid but more robust. Were i can collect specimens and capture animals and transport them. Or something like star trek...idk lol I guess I'm asking for to much
Im sure the problems with outdated ship interiors and systems will be solved but like most things with the project its going to be piece by piece.
CIG could use some of their time to update older ships instead of develop and sale more and more new ships and leave older ships abandoned with their problems and bugs. If they would keep the older ships more updated people would probably buy them again.
The main thing is, CIG is not giving up and letting go of Star Citizen. Through easy and nearly impossible goals, they keep plugging forward, even if a given patch sets them back. Don't give up on Star Citizen.
Great great video. Thanks! I have a reclaimer and yeah..its very hard to use. Looks great...doesnt really work. I actually think it's not really a 'problem' right now there are so many ships, people will find something that works..If the game worked. Bug free..with Pyro and the mission refactor. People would forgive the ships.
I suspect most players are going to CCU the older ships until the original ships are irrelevant.
Tomato..."keep them up to date?" My dude, they haven't finished a single one.
From the get-go, I disagree with the beginning part of your video. The whole reason I support it is because it is ambitious.
Unfortunately, recent updates give me more reason for concern. Specifically with Maelstrom and more complex ships like my Crucible. Maybe the idea it's nowhere near should be reassuring. New developments give me other reason. So, from a selfish engineering perspective, a kind of flip side.
If Pioneer manufacturing can change to drone beams and, 3d printing garages. I'm more than concerned about the actual spelled out webpages for repair gameplay. That they may well be abandoned. The idea we construct things on the ship, as repair. Like a wing, is in doubt for me. Especially with the lack of in depth Maelstrom info.
I don't hear much about this tech debt changing now and that worries me more.
Wish they had 120 unique missions...
Realistically, they will not redesign 99% of existing ships. They will just add components and a few touches here and there, but awfully designed interiors and exteriors will stay that way (take Retaliator as a recent example).
So again, realistically, if you want a ship that not just functions according to gold standard, but also has sensible proper looks and interior layout - the only option is to buy newest ships like Cutter or Zeus.
Home delivery tomatos confirmed!!
Just 800 million more guys and we can finish it. Here buy another version of a ship that we already have 3 of. Nothing sells like friends having a wallet fight in a video games store. Bob got a Ironclad I need 2. Bob Got 2 Polaris I need 3. How many people do you think are really going to let their ships they bought and paid cash for sit to help fly the big ass ships? Very few I am willing to bet. Also isn't the point of being in a Org. is to have a diverse fleet of ships. I seen a guy bragging about being in a org with 200 memebers and 57 Polaris on the spreadsheet. I mean what is the point of having the spreadsheet if everyone is just going to buy the same ships. Don't get me wrong I thank each and everyopne of you for funding the game for me to play and enjoy. Proud backer since 2016 and even prouder to not be a Concierge yet.
"Blinding examples of outdated ships"
*Pets my Connie-Dromeda* Shh shh its ok. Youll get TLC soon. lol
EZ fix?
Sell 20 concept ships that only get worked on and released after the game is live and on Steam.
I was hopeful, but you are so far off the mark, my dude. Yes, SC's biggest appeal is the ships, and it's biggest problem is the ships. Not due to the number of developers working on them or the amount of effort being put into them. The problem goes way, way deeper. It's that the ships are their bread and butter, and they have to make more ships to sell to keep pulling in the money that they are hemorrhaging. This results in ships that don't make sense or are poorly balanced or are just generally ill-conceived. This is the only reason they made a "Mark 2" version of the Hornet instead of just updating the existing Hornet. This is the reason they made the ATLS instead of just updating the mechanics of existing tractor beams.
@@KiithnarasAshaa I don't think there being multiple problems means I'm off the mark. This was a video meant to highlight the need for constant updates and the gold standard, not to say that it's the only problem they are dealing with. What you're describing is also an issue best seen in the ROC-DS 😂
But the mark 2 journey has been in the plans for almost the entirety of the project, it's not an update to the old ship it's a new model that fits into the lore for specific reasons, there are references to it dating back to 2015 and it's why that's the only ship that has received that treatment.
@@SpaceTomato Forgive me then for being overly critical. The constant need to gold standard _is_ a problem. I think my position is that the notion of a "gold standard" being a constantly moving target in the first place is a much larger problem. So much about what SC plans to do is still in the concept of plans phase this far in, and it's really frustrating because I, too, was sold on the dream. So much about what the studio puts out feels like there are many different departments that do things without meaningful communication and without being on the same page or having a firm grasp of the larger picture, and speculation abounds as to what that larger picture looks like because it feels like it changes every couple of years. For example, physicalizing cargo is great in concept, but it has made handling cargo vastly more tedious since CIG seem to require it at almost every step. Limiting where and how inventory can be accessed seems like a neat idea, and physicalizing that sounds cool for sure, but now just preparing larger ships for org operations can thirty minutes to an hour with a dozen extra and patently unnecessary steps where before it was five to ten minutes and straightforward. Changes and mechanics are implemented because they look neat at a superficial level without regard or consideration to their knock-on effects to time, engagement, and enjoyment.
In summary, it feels like CIG doesn't know what CIG is doing half the time, and they consistently rely on "This next big thing will solve everything!" and it never does or else is always and perpetually Coming Soon. That's kind of how it felt hearing them talk in the IAE 3 day, hoping that quantum boost and crafting will solve the problems of Master Modes. Firstly, they still fail to grasp the geometric problem, but even then, crafting is who knows how long out and quantum boost, while it certainly looks like something SC has needed for a long time, will only slightly mitigate the disaster that Master Modes has been. We said it was terrible back in 3.18 in the experimental AC modes, but they pushed forward with it anyway before they had it in a good state with everything it needed to be a solid experience.
Anyway, thanks for reading my TED talk. Obviously I have feelings about this stuff. ; )
This Tech Debt alone added at least 5 years of development
The gold standart terminology is the Problem. Why dont say, all ships are getting updates as long the game is online and playable. Like an old 747 still in service. Lets say 30 years+ at least. (Servicegame = serviceships)
They should call it current standards
they need to get a fly model definitiv to
Disciplines first, rework later.
You give CIG way too much credit still. Sizes of components were long long known, long before newer ships like the Hornet Mk2s were even built. Yet a lot of those ships don't even have components since their birth, but they should have had them.
A good example of the headless CIG chicken is the Starfighter Ion. Climb on top and open the component bays. You will see that the inside texture descriptions don't even match the outside textures. That tells you how rushed some of the ships really are, and in case of the Hornet, which was done so fast that they didn't even put components in.
Keep in mind we had physical components since roughly 2019, that's 5 years of ships, and most of them were modeled without.
Up to that point they had released about 90 ships, which is a lot, but that also means that over 60 ships that came after should have been with components, and a lot of them aren't or still have problems.
And now CIG had the glorious idea that s2 components are the biggest we will be able to handle, and the only reasonable explanation is that they don't want to remodel those big ships to make them compatible with moving them. Are they are not much bigger than s2 components, you can see them right now at IAE. Its just a foul excuse imo.
They always had a knot in their brain when it comes to designing ships. There are quite a few design choices where a logical human being just straight up facepalms. And all on the altar of balancing for some reason.
I knew for years that this comes back to haunt them. It seems that point in time is finally here. And GS needs to happen for engineering. That is a cornerstone without which engineering doesn't work for the ships that are not.
They could have *perfected the foundations* of the systems on the original Kickstarted ships in a small scale PU. They built this game backwards.
Roughly a dozen ships.
Get a foundation of final FPS movement.
Get a foundation of a final flight model.
Get a foundation of a final ship components and power system
Get a foundation of an final engineering system.
Get a foundation of a final cargo economy between a handful of space stations.
Get a foundation of a final docking and hangar system
All of that should have been DONE before working on more then 12 ships and planets.
Then all future ships could be built on those foundations with *low* risk of needing complete, expensive, reworks.
@@SharpEdgeSoda I know quite a few folks that regret voting for the game to continue expanding back then. I do wonder if Star Citizen would still be relevant today if it has gone with the original design, though. At least a sequel, I'd guess.
It's what he addresses in the video, though.
For them to reach that foundational "final" state they (the Devs wanted), they needed time. And for that time, they needed money. With only 12 ships, that money simply would not exist.
I agree in principle that due to the nature of their funding model and player driven marketing, they have needed to put a lot of focus on a good looking game before everything else.
I would argue that CIG needs to have an internal whitebox server to playtest actual game mechanics without the veneer of graphic fidelity and polish. The foundations of the game/gameplay in a lot of cases are lacking in detail, complexity, or missing entirely and the sheer spectacle afforded by the insane graphics and ship details I think often hide that fact.
Create a test server, no textures, not even full ship models, just cubes and basic placeholders, and figure out what exactly are the game loops and if they're even enjoyable to play.
Building the game to the level of graphic detail as they have obviously drives funding, but they're spending a LOT of time and dev hours building these beautiful models on shaky foundations.
@@zarakichigo Probably the biggest example I can think of exxploration. How will that work? What does it include? CIG needed to (and still does) to define what it would look like, what it would encapsulate, and how it would fit with the wider game as well as ships designed for it.
Gameplay first, ships 2nd, fidelity 3rd. Everything else comes after.