'Star Citizen' Reaches $100 Million In Funding, Alpha 2.0 Released

[heirdeux]

"Star Citizen" surpassed the $100 million crowdfunding mark this past weekend, in addition to the game's release of its Alpha 2.0 build.

'Star Citizen' Reaches $100 Million In Funding, Alpha 2.0 Released : Read more

 

[beetlejuicegr]

The game seems to have potential of greatness but i can't give 55 or whatever to join an alpha game. The crowdfunding i hope it won't lose it;s trust if they fail to cover all areas they promised.

 

[HexxIV]

I find it a bit annoying that so many articles refer to Star Citizen as a "controversial game." Where is that coming from? There is no doubt in any reasonable person's mind that the game will be released and that it will be a full blown space sim with numerous other pieces (FPS, etc.) They have provided ample detail throughout the process and given information about upcoming plans, the strategy for implementation of various things, etc. So if we are just talking about Mr. (not-so) Smart's "problems" with the game, then that is not a controversy it is a contrived quasi-defamatory declaration by a (wannabe) competitor. So can we all just stop this nonsense about controversy or risk that the game will not be released...that demonstrably false. And yes, I have spent a ton on the game so I am biased, but I believe what I am saying is in-line with any reasonable analysis of Star Citizen's development and future release.

 

[wiyosaya]

I'm an investor as well with a not so large and not so small investment. The way that I see it is the game is controversial from the standpoint of it being crowdfunded and that the game is not yet complete, thus, "investors," as seen by those on the outside looking in, are getting a raw deal because they have bought into a game that is not complete and, as the outsiders see it, may never see a general release to the public.

From my viewpoint, I knew that I was buying into a project that would be a work in progress and may never deliver. However, as HexIV says, there have been weekly progress updates and there have been planned features added constantly. I was also a fan of Strike Commander, Wing Commander, and Privateer. At that time, Chris Roberts was a leader in game innovation and development, so part of my reason for investing was that I know what Chris Roberts is capable of.

There are also people out there who complain that the alpha is buggy. Well, guess what? Alpha = buggy in the software world and those of us who have alpha access are alpha testers. I knew that having alpha access might mean that I would find bugs, and I am OK with that.

SC is treading on new ground from the standpoint of it being a game that is crowd funded. The author of this article seems to be implying that just because the list of features has stopped, that there might be something funny going on.

As I see it, though, they broadened the scope of development drastically from the initial development scope, and as a software engineer, sometimes you have to put a limit on the features that you decide to include; otherwise, you really will never complete what you set out to do.

I think that it is a smart move that there have been no recent additions of planned features to SC. When they complete the planned features and release to the public, I am willing to bet that SC will announce new development initiatives, but that they have limited the features to those announced so far, to me, means that they recognize that they need to release the game to the public sometime in the not too distant future, and continually adding features would be unwise.

 

[surphninja]

I find it a bit annoying that so many articles refer to Star Citizen as a "controversial game." Where is that coming from? There is no doubt in any reasonable person's mind that the game will be released and that it will be a full blown space sim with numerous other pieces (FPS, etc.)

It's not unreasonable to be skeptical, especially given the slow down in their funding and significant feature creep, as well as some other red flags. If you want to be a fanboy about it and stay optimistic, fine, but don't come down on people for raising legit concerns. Not everyone being reasonably pessimistic is trying to shut the game down.

 

[paladinnz]

I'm pretty amazed at how far SC has come. As a Wing Commander fan I jumped onboard early and spent about $30 for the Bounty Hunter tier, which is cheaper than other games and I get to see the game being built. Over the last 2-3 years I've had a play every so often to see the progress and once the full game is released I'm sure it will dominate my free time for quite a while. I don't see a problem with a 3-5 year development cycle, I don't think this is much longer than other ambitious AAA games the only difference is that the general public are able to see the process rather than it being behind closed doors with the occasional teaser trailer to get the hype going.

 

[dstarr3]

This just can't be good. They've got too much money and made too many promises to too many investors. This game will either be in development for the next ten years while they try to make good on all of their ideas, or it's going to come out too early and be a hot mess with really detailed 3D models.

 

[Shankovich]

It's hard to claim controversy and skepticism when they give you chunks of the completed game every few months. I haven't seen any other crowd funded dev operate at this level of care for their supporters.

 

[nycalex]

i honestly think they should just keep this project under wraps until ready.

having to announce every update on a weekly/monthly basis is never going to be good.

it puts the developers under extreme stress. what if they promised to do something but the final result is not so great? then the whole wrath of the internet comes down.

backers need to chill and just let them work. i'm currently backing 6 projects, 4 of them games in kickstarter.

guess what, i just let them finish the darn thing. i don't even comment at all in their forums.

people think investing $30 is such a big deal..........

and yes i'm aware some people have spent into the tenths of thousands on this game, but still from an investment point of view even a hundred grand is nothing for a game of this scale.

 

[ddpruitt]

I find it a bit annoying that so many articles refer to Star Citizen as a "controversial game." Where is that coming from? There is no doubt in any reasonable person's mind that the game will be released and that it will be a full blown space sim with numerous other pieces (FPS, etc.)

Because it's 4 years and 100 million dollars later and they have very little to show for it. They're not developing their own engine, their using someone existing tools. Hell it took Bethesda less to create Skyrim, or CryTech to create Crysis. And yet they keep asking for money although they don't have anything to show for it and claim that they have enough to go on for a long time. The deadlines are slipping more and more, and they're not open about this. I've found that weekly progress reports are an easy way to give the illusion of progress. Controversial may be the wrong term, but it seems like the only defenders are those that sank money into it. The pieces they've shown are essentially small demos that shouldn't take that long to get up and running (a small team should be able to do it in a month or so). Remember A:CM, I don't believe videos until I see an actual running engine.

I originally wanted to fund this, but now that I've seen the game obtain a Blizzard-like timetable, I'm glad I didn't.

 

[paladinnz]

I find it a bit annoying that so many articles refer to Star Citizen as a "controversial game." Where is that coming from? There is no doubt in any reasonable person's mind that the game will be released and that it will be a full blown space sim with numerous other pieces (FPS, etc.)

Because it's 4 years and 100 million dollars later and they have very little to show for it. They're not developing their own engine, their using someone existing tools. Hell it took Bethesda less to create Skyrim, or CryTech to create Crysis. And yet they keep asking for money although they don't have anything to show for it and claim that they have enough to go on for a long time. The deadlines are slipping more and more, and they're not open about this. I've found that weekly progress reports are an easy way to give the illusion of progress. Controversial may be the wrong term, but it seems like the only defenders are those that sank money into it. The pieces they've shown are essentially small demos that shouldn't take that long to get up and running (a small team should be able to do it in a month or so). Remember A:CM, I don't believe videos until I see an actual running engine.

I originally wanted to fund this, but now that I've seen the game obtain a Blizzard-like timetable, I'm glad I didn't.

It seems like maybe you've not researched enough, for those people who have purchased ships they have had access to early versions of SC for quite a while now. Initially you could only walk around/inside various ships in a hangar, then they released a dogfight module which allowed you to fly vs AI or human opponents, all in engine and with impressive levels of detail. Now there is a full flight training module and more with the Alpha 2.0 release. If you know of a small dev team that could do this in a month or so I'm sure there are plenty of people who would hire them on the spot.
Yes it's taking time but this anything but vapourware.

 

[techguy911]

I have seen games like this get to the point where they think they are ready to launch but gets cancelled at last second.
Elite Dangerous is already in it's first expansion planet landing ect. and where is SC still in alpha either they need to hire more people or risk people pulling out.

 

[Oryx__]

"Because it's 4 years and 100 million dollars later and they have very little to show for it."

Other than the dog fighting game, the hanger, the racing game and free flight mode. And I'm sorry no small team could have put those together in a month. not with that level of detail. And now released a section of one system that showcases the seamless FPS to flying to floating through space in the first person back to your ship and so on all with other players online. They've heavily modded cry engine to allow them to do all this in massive solar systems and that was a major source of delays for finally showing a working in engine example of how the final game would play.

And that's without even mentioning the literal step by step information they've showed on everything from ship design to clothing for characters on pretty much a weekly basis. I was skeptical how well their ideas would come together in the end before they released Alpha 2.0 but anyone that has played a decent array of AAA video games can now see just how ambitious what they were trying to pull off was. Even just walking around looking at ships in the hangar showed off how ridiculously high quality the assets being created were.

It has been delayed and there definitely has been feature creep but I think the reason backers (myself to the tune of $40) probably appear so jumpy when unfair criticism appears is that even a casual look at the project would show that it is in no way vapor ware or some kind of scam. Chris Roberts was rich before this and simply doesn't need your money.

 

[Dalriaden]

The $5 million dollar stretch ago actually made for the voice actors, it has nothing to do with the funding past that. (although I guess it couldn't hurt.)

Squadron 42 will feature celebrity voice-acting including at least one favorite from Wing Commander and 50 total missions.

 

[CleanInternet]

Those giving negative advise know very little about AAA game development. SC started dev 3 years ago. 5 to 6 years are required to make such game. For those following progress, the last 6 months have been the proof that CIG is doing very well, with a team of 268 and growing.
The solo game Squadron 42 will be released end of 2016 and the MMO in 2017, with Beta starting end of 2016.
Dont get be twisted by no sayer that a few months ago was still shooting vaporware and scam everywhere. Every so called "red flag" have been proved to be false, from a handful of dedicated Trolls.

 

[dragonsqrrl]

They're not developing their own engine, their using someone existing tools. Hell it took Bethesda less to create Skyrim, or CryTech to create Crysis.

While it's true they're using an existing engine, to say that they're only utilizing existing tools couldn't be further from the truth. This isn't exactly news, but CryEngine 3 isn't suitable for environments at these scales, and much of the challenge of development until recently has been implementing a custom 64-bit physics and coordinate system. The flight model is custom and driven by this physics system, and the local physics grid at the heart of multicrewed ships and the first person universe is also a custom implementation.

As for the length of development, it is taking a long time, but given the scope, scale, and technical novelty of the project, I don't think it's at all unreasonable. Keep in mind that games like Skyrim and Crysis typically aren't announced until the project is deep into development, while Star Citizen was basically announced at the outset. Those games also have the benefit of their scope being largely predetermined from the beginning, while the budget and scope for Star Citizen expanded greatly over its first 2 years due to the very nature of crowd funding.

And yet they keep asking for money although they don't have anything to show for it and claim that they have enough to go on for a long time. The deadlines are slipping more and more, and they're not open about this. I've found that weekly progress reports are an easy way to give the illusion of progress. Controversial may be the wrong term, but it seems like the only defenders are those that sank money into it. The pieces they've shown are essentially small demos that shouldn't take that long to get up and running (a small team should be able to do it in a month or so). Remember A:CM, I don't believe videos until I see an actual running engine.

I'm not sure what you mean by all of this, as much of it is just objectively wrong. It kind of just sounds like you're unfamiliar with the project, and found a chance to parrot misinformed criticisms that have either been shot down countless times elsewhere, or are now easily dispelled through in-game content and behavior. They haven't had a new stretch goal since 2014 when they hit $65m, and many stretch goals have long since been fulfilled, including now the beginnings of the persistent universe.

The source of all the controversy you've alluded to was Derek Smart's fears earlier this year that CIG didn't have a solution for their 64-bit systems, which could've been a project killer on its own. Other game game devs (if you can even call Derek Smart that anymore) voiced similar concerns in this regard. This demonstrates both the difficulty of implementing such a system and its fundamental importance to the project. These systems are now easily verified by the existence of Alpha 2.0, as none of it would be feasible without higher precision.

This is by far the most open game development project ever. As you said there are weekly updates, not to mention the comprehensive monthly reports or the slew of other content they publish on a daily basis. Given just how much information is available, and how easily accessible it is, it always amazes me by how much misinformation manages to spread around. I suppose you can believe whatever you want, but it doesn't sound like you're particularly qualified to make an informed judgement either way.

 

[cats_Paw]

Im looking forward to this, but due to what the industry has been doing, ill be skeptic until proven wrong.
Nothing against Star Citizen in particular, you simply learn to be careful when you get burned a few times (lucky for me it was only once, starcraft 2).
I think many of the NO sayers are just advising caution to others, but it can be seen as negative advise...

 

[demonkoryu]

Huh, starcraft? I wonder what your gripe is with that?

 

[The Angry Pacifist]

what´s controversial about it, that it has the same budget like GTA 4 and that the money is not coming from publisher suits?
I think the only controversial thing is that so called experts who should know that every triple A MMO takes between 5-6 years to make are bitching that SC which is only 3 years in development is not released. Oh and they should of course also be finished with a triple A single player campaign, building a company from scratch. Yep, that´s so controversial.

 

[The Angry Pacifist]

I have seen games like this get to the point where they think they are ready to launch but gets cancelled at last second.
Elite Dangerous is already in it's first expansion planet landing ect. and where is SC still in alpha either they need to hire more people or risk people pulling out.

Releasing a boring barebone with dumbed down game mechanics like Elite is somehow an accomplishment? Launching this skeleton game was an insult in the first place and now selling expansion DLC is the continuation of audacity. That´s a true rip off, when you can get a more feature complete game like Star Citizen for 45$ if you just have the patience to wait for actual quality which naturally, takes longer.

 

[mapesdhs]

Releasing a boring barebone with dumbed down game mechanics like Elite is somehow an accomplishment? ...

Boring to you maybe, not to the thousands who happily play it. Stop posting the usual boring FUD, it's such an old, tired and irrelevant viewpoint. You might not like the game, but loads of others do, so stating ED is this or that when it's just your point of view is silly. Once again posts here turn into a pointless SC vs. ED rant, when anyone with half a brain should hope both fully succeed, and anyone who slags off either game in some absolute sense isn't doing either dev process any favours.

A more complete game, yeah right... Watched someone's upload of the Alpha2 this week, constant crashes, and I agree with the uploader's comments that getting the local physics thing to work correctly is going to be very difficult. Not impossible one hopes, but by heck they've bitten off an awful lot on which to chew. CryEngine ain't exactly great for this sort of thing. At least Squad had the supreme sense to use UE4 instead.

ED has been fully functional for over a year now, already into the first expansion, one of many for multiple years to come, and it's a game that is greatly enjoyed by lots of people right now. Thus, your opinion is purely that, an opinion, and IMO a silly one since I'd place far more credit in those of people who actually play the game on a regular basis.

I hope SC succeeds, because it'd be a disaster in all sorts of ways if it doesn't, but I'm so sick of this endless need to slag of ED every time either game comes up on here.

 

[royalcrown]

ONLY 37 more years to Beta .9 ! Should be called "Star Citizen the Duke Nukem Saga" or "Star Citizen - Half Life edition"

 

[cats_Paw]

Huh, starcraft? I wonder what your gripe is with that?

I could try to explain it in a long post, but to keep it short, the game offers little for me. You can learn to do the same builds PROs do in 1 day flat (with some RTS experience), and losses and wins are more random due to how the tiers of the units create such huge gaps in terms of usefulness.

I am being serious about this since I was able to beat GM players by carbon coping builds from koreans.
And this was with 20 games played over all in 1v1 matches.

And I also remember a friend of mine getting to GM by 6 pooling everyone (even those who knew him and knew what he was doing).

It just felt off for me.

 

[BrutalAttis]

I am really enjoying Elite and truly hope SC makes it too, great time for space sims ... its about time. I kickstart supported neither, I did buy ED on release and pre-ordered its expansion and did some minor support by buying ED paint jobs etc. If SC releases, I will buy it after a month (if the reviews are decent). My gaming days go back to original 80s ED and I've played and like Privateer back in the day too.

With coming VR tech playing ED or SC (when it comes out) will really be a dream come true for. Back in the 80s thing like the internet, true VR and the graphics we have to days was unimaginable.

 

[paladinnz]

I am really enjoying Elite and truly hope SC makes it too, great time for space sims ... its about time. I kickstart supported neither, I did buy ED on release and pre-ordered its expansion and did some minor support by buying ED paint jobs etc. If SC releases, I will buy it after a month (if the reviews are decent). My gaming days go back to original 80s ED and I've played and like Privateer back in the day too.

With coming VR tech playing ED or SC (when it comes out) will really be a dream come true for. Back in the 80s thing like the internet, true VR and the graphics we have to days was unimaginable.

I recently purchased ED on sale and have been pretty impressed at how well it works with my DK2. It's great being able to look around to see where you are going or to track an opponent. I hope SC fully supports VR as it really makes a difference.