How Far Away Is Star Citizen 1.0?

[@tenpoundfortytwo]

Now...not everyone is going to be as pessimistic as me. I'm just going with my gut on these dates and obviously I hope it all comes a lot earlier! Would love to hear your guesses!

[@rapamune]

6-7 years minimum based on pre-production stuff barely running on an offline workstation, not to mention the feature creep

[@CitizenScott]

2028 “post-alpha.” 2030 1.0 release.

[@crispy9175]

​@@CitizenScottyeah, probably good guesses. I'm hoping they get enough game elements in the next year or two to make it fun to play consistently and long term (stability, org elements, some progression etc).

[@olternaut]

@@rapamune Minimum!!!

[@olternaut]

@@CitizenScott When are they going to call their game a beta???

[@DicehunterSC]

I'd be amazed if we get 1.0 before 2030.

[@Sams911]

right?

[@Fragnatix]

They might come with 1.0 sooner than we think, but chances are much later than anticipated. Like, no chance of base building from CR 12-18months lol But...maybe?

[@RecklessFables]

They have absolutely no motivation to go live when they had their best funding year of all time every year. Can't possibly make as much money once it goes live than it does now. People actually purchasing a game will have expectations. And I love that we're talking about 1.0 when 2 years ago we were talking about the path to 4.0 being late...

[@StoneCoolds]

​@@Fragnatixlots of white knights are saying 1.0 is coming 2025 or 2026 at the latest, because "they show us a video of almost finished and working space stations" And people wonder why politicians keep getting elected world wide promising the same broken promises for 40 years of career 😂

[@Stayler17]

It won't happen. Petty much 0.1% we'll get 1.0 in the 20s The 30s is when we'll get it

[@Chewywrinkles]

I’m just glad I started following this game as a teenager. 11 years later and I’ve been an electrician for 9 years. Really looking forward to playing star citizen when I retire.

[@Nobody-uu6ki]

i might be the only one here who will be alive to see the game release i am 14

[@eniroi]

I'm starting to consider adding all the ships I have in my testament.... I'm 44 now..

[@masaitube]

@@eniroi Yes, it's surprising, my account is worth 4 times the purchase price

[@churros724]

@@eniroi Even as a joke a reddit post with a screenshot of your will having a star citizen clause would legit get thousands of upvotes hahah

[@danford6678]

@@masaitube Unless you have a 2012 LTI Golden ticket account with multiple Javelins and BMM your account is worth 50% of the melt value.

[@lhazaar-7]

Based on today’s information a 2029-2030 target is a good guess. CIG can always speed up the release by moving things after 1.0. The best move for them will be to change the process sp they can have polished releases after 4.0. I don’t think the project will survive if Squadron releases and SC is not in a much much better state stability wise, and I think CIG knows this.

[@artstalker8065]

This may be why SQ42 is 2 years away from release and not 1 as we thought.

[@TJ-gh6cg]

It seems like a realistic expectation but I don't think that's what should be expected from CIG. If this expectation will be the consensus, it will take them until 2035.

[@christopherjohnson2171]

@@artstalker8065 I remember when the release date for SQ42 was 2016, prepare for more disappointment and delays.

[@CitizenScott]

Soon™

[@tenpoundfortytwo]

The only correct answer!

[@brandonedwards1181]

10-15years from now

[@MCJamZam]

Honestly, this is a refreshingly "sober" take on the timeline. As a tech enthusiast and professional 3D artist I totally agree with your take, and imo your technical knowledge shines through here. I've heard plenty other people predict a much shorter timeline, but so far not from anyone I think understands the technical aspect of this on a deeper level. The amount of work they're planning to get through is crazy. I like it, I think it's a good plan, but it's going to be a long ride before we get to 1.0. I just hope they stick to it now.

[@horsthorstensen1277]

Marketing wise it would make a lot of sense to get 1.0 ready by the time sq42 releases. Whenever that might be.

[@rwilliamm]

But they have to finish SQ42 ep.2 and who knows if they are planning ep.3

[@godmode8687]

At the same time? Nah i dont really think that makes sense. Have the 1.0 come out roughly one year after Squadron 42. So people havent completely forgotten, but arent tired out anymore. But most importantly 1.0 needs to be proper, a bad 1.0 would be way worse than one several years after Squadron 42

[@Stayler17]

That's impossible Why even write this comment?

[@Aethid]

There is no way that is happening, unless they delay SQ42 by multiple years.

[@jamesschmames6416]

@@Aethid You are making the assumption that SQ42 is anywhere near ready. 2026?!? Bwahahaha!!!

[@GhostOokami]

I'm thinking 3-6 years leaning toward the end of that for 1.0. Here's hoping sooner than later.

[@nemesisone8927]

id rather make 9 years and thats modest :) of course you will get stuff in the meantime

[@Yorhosashi]

SQ42 release date 2026 star citizen release date 2039? timespan building 1 star system, around 3/5 years timespan building a capital ship, around8/12 months timespan building a small ships, around 2/4months 3 star systems = 9/15 years my guess is that Star citizen 1.0 will take around 12/15 years to release. or even more years because of the new mmo mechanics like base building, space stations and more new tech that needs to be made and integrated into the game.

[@Stayler17]

3 years shouldn't even be an option We don't even know if we're getting server meshing next year being that it always delays to next year

[@Yorhosashi]

it takes game companies around 3 to 5 years to make open world games, those open world's are not complete planets like star citizen is trying to do here, even with all the tools they made it still takes a lot of man hour to cover a full planet's surface and also underground with content.

[@NigerianNinja-d6h]

I think their target is SQ42 in 2026 and sc in 2027. Doesn't mean they'll hit the target but it makes sense to let SQ42 tide the community over for a year or so before 1.0.

[@deansandstorm962]

During the captains of industry presentation they said the pioneer is scheduled to come in the next 12 months, but also said it won’t be out in time for the first patch with base building. Meaning the base building part is at least less than 12 months from now.

[@123Andersonev]

there are different tiers to base building and the pioneer sits at the top of the tree, essentially from a dev perspective your first priority would be establishing priority for surface level base building with space bases being a second or third phase, make sense?, that doesn't mean pioneers will be useless on release it just means they would be tailored towards ground bases first with space bases being a later addition.

[@deansandstorm962]

@@123Andersonev It can build any tier of base even the small ones

[@aviator2252]

Which trickle down would mean, crafting, refining as well​@@deansandstorm962

[@123Andersonev]

@@deansandstorm962 not at minimal viable product it can't, welcome to development, it's an iterative process as a stakeholder you'll feel much more comfortable on the final furlong

[@123Andersonev]

the problem is you seem to think all the toys are delivered all at once in a single cohesive mass, that's not how dev works, resources are constantly pulled in multiple directions at all times, therefore devs do this thing called triage not all that dissimilar to prioritising what should be tackled first to meet expectations.

[@theamericanaromantic]

I think 6 years is probably what we are looking at

[@qween2077]

That would have been 18 years of development until a entry level release

[@Frank-os6gq]

Yeah my guess is 3-5 which i think is very likely now that server meshing is proven to work.

[@midbay]

Pahahaha how maddd is that. I do think your in the right time frame though, i am thinking 2031-2034 till we actually see what we would have called a fully developed game back in 2024 amd by then this ip would be a fish out of water

[@th3orist]

I think its 10yrs away honestly.

[@theamericanaromantic]

@@Frank-os6gq 3-5 is my guess too but you always go with the worst case scenario and then tack on a year when you’re dealing with CIG

[@lukasz8487]

We are used to it and learn that Cig has not achieved its stated time goals. However, fewer employees worked on SC in the past. There are now supposed to be 1000, so I think we will be less disappointed than in the past. The only obstacle that could come is server meshing delay. and so everything else would be delayed as well

[@stuartburns8657]

Time between patches getting much longer. 2030 minimum

[@Franziskaner21]

We've forgotten about the server meshing challenge. Now our worry is how they're going to cram so many ridiculously challenging things into the game. xD But we still have the initial problem. They've got very little shame offering this without having a stable server meshing. I've seen Evocati and it's depressing how poorly it performs with 200 players.

[@Fragnatix]

Big team != faster development. lol speaking by experience

[@jamesschmames6416]

Words to this effect were stated after CitCon '23. How did '24 work out for ya?!?

[@stuartburns8657]

@@Fragnatix Seem to recall John Romero "design is king!" thought the same. Next are projects like Duke Nukem Forever - guilty of never knowing when to stop, and constantly adding new features and trends seen on other titles. Then you have Mr Roberts history, to which when given full control, is MS had intervened, the studio would have gone bankrupt. You all know that while the cash is flowing, he has zero incentive to release. Now in danger of trying to offer something for everyone, whilst appealing to no-one. The time between patches is increasing exponentially, and sadly, whilst attendees at the live events just sit clapping like idiots, instead of booing and hecking to show displeasure.

[@JWebmeister]

I wanted to see a realistic plan for 1.0, including scope, schedule and resources / financial plan. “Line in the sand” is grossly exaggerating what was actually communicated to backers at CitCon. Maybe the details have been worked out and it’ll be drip-fed over the next year, but I think it would be foolish to give CIG the benefit of the doubt. I suspect they are where they need to think about the end-game feature-set and content so that the refined requirements and technical implementation of server meshing and other tech is “potentially” capable of supporting end-game content (i.e. doesn’t explicitly “exclude” the ability to support that scope). Considering how much Tier 0 / backlog features and content there is, I think 5 years is a realistic expectation for timeframe for a MVP, and some of what was shown, such as the space stations, may not be achievable at the scale it was shown as.

[@Spidder81]

I literally have no idea when 1.0 will be released. Im just taking one step at a time and see how development goes once Pyro and server meshing is LIVE and working. I think getting dynamic server meshing working is one of its biggest and hardest hurdles.

[@falco5150]

Been the same story ever since it's inception. "Once we get server meshing figured out....its downhill from there". 13 years later....here we are still being told server meshing is right around the corner lol.

[@TheGalaxy1]

Actually in an interview the other day with a French reporter Ben said static server meshing is the hardest bit and most of the work, after thats complete it's relatively straight forward 😊

[@falco5150]

@TheGalaxy1 Yea so, exactly what I just said 🤣

[@Brodoodle]

Alot of the later things on the list really are going to come down to how many people server meshing can hold/ CIG want to host cost wise. Also considering they want monster hunting and base building (likely t0) in 12-18 months how on earth are peole expecting the 4 dozen other things to be implmented in the 6-12 month window before a SQ42 release after that 😂 We are easily not seeing everything stated and in thier words a completly polished state for 1.0 by 2029 or later, not without some seroius cutting

[@AreRisnes]

13:08 #LÅST It’s no issue for the Star Citizen team to launch Star Citizen 1.0 by Advent 2025 - they've got the people, and it’s not a massive challenge anymore; everything updates quicker and better than before. No, it's not a big job. All this unserious pessimism? Just noise to pull in attention, but that’s a quick way to lose trust. And that's the last thing you want.

[@HappyChap8]

CIG will run out of money way before 1.0 is close to release.

[@QoP..]

Unless they can keep raking in a minimum of 5 million usd per month, i'd be inclined to agree with you.

[@vliedtke]

they do have the release of SQ42 lined up...

[@QoP..]

@@vliedtke I hope it'll be a success. What we've seen looks very good. I'm just speculating here but Star Citizen's existence might depend somewhat on SQ42 doing well.

[@vliedtke]

@@QoP.. thats for sure. From what I understand, SQ42 has been their main focus of development as of now, so if it fails that would probably mean that most of the development was wasted. It does look good though, so I would hope that the release is enough to keep CIG going for a few more years.

[@Mr.Universe]

​@@vliedtkespeculative release.

[@BigBobBlazer]

The only thing CIG has ever learned is how to manipulate it's backers in a more clever fashion. CitizenCon has only just concluded and we're already seeing it with the RSI Galaxy. They've essentially postponed the production of the RSI Galaxy to some vague, unimportant time, years in the future, as opposed to it going into production immediately after the Polaris (which is almost done). They have cleverly distracted most by making it more about the Galaxy's ability to build bases. But underneath all that, they got backers to not really notice that they're not going to make the RSI Galaxy anymore. It's release date is somewhat akin to the BMM (we're not working it, we don't plan on working on it, but it'll get done some day). Highly disappointing considering that some backers were even speculating that the RSI Galaxy might get released at IAE this year. But, don't kid yourself. This had nothing to do with the Perseus having more in common with the Polaris than the Galaxy. This had everything to do with CIG selling another ship, the MISC Starlancer. If they kept the Galaxy as the premier base-building ship, most wouldn't buy the Starlancer BLD. Plus, the Starlancer BLD is easier to make, smaller, not modular, and CIG has already gotten the backers money for the RSI Galaxy, so there's no real need to get it made now. And here is the lesson. Don't give CIG money for concept ships. It's a sure-fire way to get them to deprioritize the ship you want made.

[@eoconnor2000]

With the Nerfs I would not even buy ships that are available - fight the urge and buy the ship in game . The only problem is if CIG notice a drop in sales that option will be gone as well.

[@egth1300]

I hope people buy alot of ships and concepts so i will get a AAAA game somewhen

[@kleim3139]

It actually hurts to know you´re 101% correct

[@tycondero1647]

I think much faster than we think. I believe that CIG starts to feel that they need to deliver. They will probably time it about one year or so after release of SQ42.

[@Nikalin]

It was good to meet you at CitCon! (I was the volunteer at the end of Day 2 looking after the line to meet Jared / Disco Lando). Looking forward to seeing everything they showed on on stage in game :)

[@tenpoundfortytwo]

Yes was great to meet you! Thanks for saying hello! Chatting to viewers was my highlight of the event so thank you!

[@TheFireBean]

That's a fair take 10P. For me, people need to be prepared that a 1.0 release will take more time. It will be a while before it comes online, but it's also fair to say that progress is being made, and the QL improvements are there with ever patch. One major critique I have is that a patch should be playable within a week, even pre-1.0 - no question. This past week, post CON is a very bad look for CIG.

[@tenpoundfortytwo]

Completely agree with all that! This week is a bit of a nightmare for them really, all the attention on the game, people trying it out and it's broken. And thank you very much for becoming a channel member!

[@nathanforrester5140]

Ok time is always interesting to talk about. We have lived in the working on server meshing world for what 7 years now. Groundbreaking tech that has never been done before. I do not see any of these new systems in that same category. You have a fancy version of no man sky planet building. You have a story along the lines of starfield. You have some landing zones to build. This is all standard stuff. I really think the slow down on the new stuff is how much old stuff has to be rebuilt. The main hold up this year had been old systems. The new stuff was fine. How much old stuff needs to be redone for us to see the new planet tech. Who knows. If nothing needs rebuilding we will start seeing this new tech by the end of next year. Once they can create the new planets and all the little sites of interest then the new systems should follow. They have teams working on landing zones long before the other stuff is done. I would guess a team can do a landing zone in a year. That is about how long new lorvill took. The social stuff is hardly Groundbreaking and will not effect how fast the other work can happen. So baring a hitch in server meshing 3 to 4 years for everything but the player made space stations.

[@Ilwrath]

Here's my prediction: Base building has been worked on actively since the beginning of 2024. They are looking to roll it out by Q2/Q3 2025 up to large buildings, which is why they are going to also roll out Starlancer BLD by then. The Galaxy was put on the backburner because finishing the Polaris delayed starting on the Galaxy and they already had the Starlancer in the pipeline so they came to the conclusion that making the BLD variant will be the only way to hit their target with base building - more than anything this is a sign of hard targets having been set. Pioneer and XL buildings will come later, earliest Q1/2026. Finally adding medical gameplay makes sense because with that and bases there's actually some functioning game loops (if the technical advancements are there) that will allow citizens to pass their time during 2025/2026. Ironclad also works well with base building/ground warfare. Now If you think you're pessimistic, here's how I see it: Something happened that has made them speed up production and set hard targets. Maybe funding projections? The next two years in terms of deadlines is going to be brutal. SQ42 in 2026 is going to take much more than they are willing to admit and it will eat resources from SC, but they will publish no matter what. It might end up good, but it could end up being a buggy mess. Regardless of the outcome, 1.0 will be pushed out late 2026 or during 2027 and it will end up being a shell of what was said in this years citizen con with either features missing, not working or 1/2 done and then completely forgotten. IF SQ42 its a success they might be able to gather enough funding to continue developing 1.0 to a playable state if they don't start dreaming about a sequel to SQ42. One of the biggest problems I see here is that despite all the talk, I don't think there's actually that much to port from SQ42 to SC. It was always mostly an excuse to funnel fund and dev time towards the vision. I definitely won't say it's all doom and gloom, but I do think there's hard times ahead. I've pledged in trickles during the years, but the total sum is actually pretty embarrassing. I still think there's potentially a very good game to be had at the end of this wild ride, but I'm under no illusion about money being absolutely wasted during the first half or 3/4ths of development.

[@beny9360]

Is it valid to try and use past experience to estimate future dates? In my programming experience most of the time is spent building the foundation, the tools, engine etc. once you’ve got that working iteratively expansion of it is much easier/faster. It’s certainly not next year though. I’d give 3 years as a minimum, as my very optimistic guess. So probably not too much different to others for a more reasonable guess.

3 years minimum to get every 1.0 feature in and then 3 years for polish. But more likely is that they drop stuff before that happens.

[@tree0311]

With Nyx and Castra, Nyx definitely seems well within reach for next year. We know what is in the Nyx system, it is not a complex system at all. They haven't show us the rest, but even with the tools they have now sans Genesis it should be relatively easy for them to make what is in Nyx. The Galactapedia entries for the Nyx system aren't dated by any means, they are updated from the original Galactic Guide, so what they talk about is what we're getting. The elephant in that particular room is the Vanduul, and we have no idea what that gameplay element will look like. As for Castra, even though Sherman is a big new landing zone, historically it is not hard for CIG to make Landing Zones. I do think it will set sort of a new standard for LZs, but they have two different Landing Zone teams, or at least they did before the restructuring over the last year. And beyond Sherman, and CASCOM, Castra is very much a nothing system. So expecting these systems to take a long time just isn't in line with what they have the ability to produce. And with Static Server Meshing almost ready for release and Dynamic soon to follow, they really need to expand the universe to give shards a bit more breathing room for higher player counts.

[@Irundyste]

CIG broke our concept of game development timeline

[@festersmith8352]

I think ED did it first. Released there game 10 years ago, and still hasn't completed what they promised 12 years ago. But hey, at least its "released" right? I can't over how people are so hung up on a word attached to a title, thats seems to have no relevance to quality and game play content anymore. Gameplay videos I'm seeing of the "released" AAAA level SWG makes SC's AI look really smart on the average experience.

[@ruorick]

SQ42 Episode 1 end of 2026, but that's being optimistic. 1.0 is 10+ years away.

[@SBbigbird]

To put it simply, it’s so far away that I’m concerned how the next 5-8 cit-cons are going to turn out…

[@MegaMerijn]

While it sucks we might not see a lot of these things soon, we can at least finally see what the aim for the game will be so we can be happy that they are going to work on the things we want in game.

[@MrGadfly772]

Oh my word! 5 to 10 years more?! I am 65 so you're telling me that there is a good chance I'll be dead by the time this game comes out. That's nuts. They really need to amend their patches and just get the damn game out as soon as possible. Various updates can be added as people play the game, but people will grow weary of waiting and they will only loose what little people they have hanging on. Then they won't have ANY revenue stream, and they will die. We don't need all the professions up and running. We didn't need Pyro, we don't need another batch of new ships, we don't need to rebalance combat, we don't need better graphics, we don't need flora and fauna to be spectacular. All these things can be added LATER! The biggest issue that Star Citizen faces is credibility.

[@csdigitaldesign]

I think he's being a bit pessimistic somewhat. Generally speaking all this would take at least 4 years... but it's CIG so maybe 4-6 years. Not 10.... 10 is just far too far off I don't really think it will be that long.

[@festersmith8352]

Explain the difference between content creeping in over the years from now. Or content creeping in after it releases faster for the sake of being able to say so. There is no way to make content any faster. But one could add the word "released" to the title with a few keystrokes What is it you are looking for here? I'm now spring chicken either. But I also know everyday you go to bed is another day you survived. The next may be that time, regardless of age. My kids are well aware of investment in SC, and have my login info. They also have instructions what to do with it, if they choose not to play it.

[@daglas95y]

Where did you get the purple black hole wall lamp?

[@MrBrutalicus]

Lets hope that they stay alive long enough to release their vison of 1.0.

[@123Andersonev]

we're all mostly sleeping on the FOIP updates, they look awesome.

[@ChannelyMcChannelChan]

I think you may be about right, it may take 6-8 more years... but I'm hoping that the development will accelerate a bit once SQ42 is out.

[@carsten1004]

HI, after CitCon I put down my opinion. When we will see a release could happen and taking into account that they take 2-3 years of polishing the game. So in the end it will come to the question how many game loops can they develop at the same time? I guess this will be 2 or 3 and so we will see probably crafting first than changes to mining with the quality stuff coming in next to build the basis for further development so Thorsten jumps back and forth between base building and mining... I talked to Thorsten when leaving CitCon. He said they have made progress on more topics than is currently communicated. The issues is probably to keep the first 4.0 release small to not have to much new stuff in there. A stable 4.0 would be nice to get the progress in...

[@Mathieu_soDjo]

imo they'd like to tie the release of SQ42 with some big SC event, so i'd wager we see 1.0 in the year after SQ42's release, possibly with less features than promised now.

[@festersmith8352]

Which seems like weird logic to me. Tag the word "release" to the title and that would be ok, even if its gutted from expectations. That word has a huge amount of power in this industry, but has zero relevance to actual quantity or quality of a product. It also seems to offer blanket immunity in some regards. 3 Games "released" Elite Dangerous released 10 years ago (promised way more than SC did 12 years ago, and still hasn't lived up to those promises) Starfield Star Wars Galaxies How they holding up? 4.0 has been gutted and it getting mixed reactions. Imagine if SC released in a gutted state. Would that be ok? Or would the internet say "see, we told you they couldn't do it"! "Losers fell for the SCAM we been claiming for years".

[@Platinumsniper]

The Castra "pre-production" looked better than Nyx in some cases. I fell like they want to start proving they can get multiple systems out within a decent time frame. I want to say Nyx 4.1 and Castra end of next year. I am fully aware that I could be massively wrong.

[@LarsBahner]

I believe your roadmap is wrong, ie. what comes when. But th e amount of work sounds about right. What I usually say to my friends is: "at least". Meaning not before this and then we have to make a new guesstimate. So at least 4 years. Not saying that it releases in 4, but it could. More likely we will be able to make a better estimate then. The trendy take away from this video is the question: Can it be done in this decade?

[@illgottengains1314]

Totally agree regarding the sandworm… it reminds me of King Kong in Warzone which was terrible

[@Tenno-Heika]

Far enough to worry about it ^^ LIVE is broken, PTU takes forever, EVO build is a Server Error fiesta... I think you're right about Genesis. If it was really in an advanced state they wouldn't have restricted to 5 systems at release.

[@1ApeinSpace]

I've told several people, I'm getting this game for my grandkids. Which are now 1 and 2 years old. I just hope I live long enough to teach them how to play it. I never thought I would live to be 62 years old and now I need to hang on at least another 10 years.

[@Aethid]

5 years is my guess. They have solved the biggest technical challenges, and most of what is left is far more traditional content production (which CIG are actually decent at) and game feature development. I dont really see any tech that needs to be built specifically for stations. Its just art assets, more or less. We are genuinely on the (still long) home stretch here.

Lots of gameplay code needs to be written. Not always simple at this scale.

[@Aethid]

True, but it is far more conventional with far fewer unknowns than what we have been dealing with up to now.

[@nerfi2983]

Same for me 2028 year. Squadron 42 team will focus on gameplay features that star Citizen lack before. We will arrive in the 3rd act of the development and thing will move faster. 4 years for cig to add all the thing from the 1.0 citizen con presentation isn't crazy. The only thing we need is server meshing dynamic.

[@TheGalaxy1]

If it was my decision, I would say it would be a good idea to have 1.0 complete as squadron 42 releases so that the wider audience can jump in to star citizen after completing squadron with that main story to guide them through the mmo. Do i think that will happen? Maybe as I'm quite optimistic, but reguardless it's fun to think about.

[@TinMan445]

I think from their presentation, that’s their goal. But we all know it’s not possible.

[@TheGalaxy1]

​​@@TinMan445well it's worth saying that, IF they don't immediately jump onto the second chapter of s42, that there will be 1200 people working on star citizen. I think things are going to speed up very quickly. They have been working on engine for so long that it's as likely time as ever that things are going to really start clicking together.

[@SeraphimSimu]

​@TheGalaxy1 nothing in game dev just "clicks together" unfortunately. I'm guessing we won't see a 1.0 until 2030 at CIG's pace

[@TheGalaxy1]

@@SeraphimSimu you're right, of course it doesn't. I guess what I'm saying is that if the stars align, I anticipate the possibility engine development will slow as tools are being "completed", more devs will start working on 1.0 content and everyone working on squadron will come fully over to star citizen. I'm hopeful. Once server meshing is online, they can't say that's holding them back. The planet tech will speed up system creation etc so I'm optimistic

[@404-Err0r]

According to ChatGPT after putting in a lot of parameters and analysing old habits history, set backs and milestones... it gave what i believe an accurate and believable year of 2035.

[@038alpha]

let s say it s far enough that they ll have to redefine sc again before we get it in our hands

[@tenpoundfortytwo]

😭that is one of my big fears!

[@StoneCoolds]

They are going to showcase the end of end games, your own DYSON SPHERE OF DEATH, The ultimate org building, 40.000km long, capable of building and fueling the new mega capital ship. And show many "greybox" videos 😂

[@captain-hooked]

I think it's best to think of features as prerequisites for SQ42, launched with SQ42, or will come afterwards. This way we avoid dates and can see the dependencies between the projects which should give us an idea of timeframes. IMO, CIG intends to deliver most features for 1.0 in the same year as the SQ42 launch. My expectation is that it won't be ready in time and likely needs an extra year or two, so at the end of the day, it will probably be quite similar to your estimates.

[@ImaITman]

As someone who’s invested 1,000 it’ll be about forever from now. I DO think we’ll get squadron 42 in the next 2 years and it’ll be a really really special experience in the gaming world.

[@StoneCoolds]

According to the White Knight Encyclopedia, volume 13, 1.0 will come next year

[@Alexander-z2m8m]

From my point of view, and this is of course limited, everything depends on server stability. Whether server meshing will solve all of these problems, or should solve them, is the question. That would be nice, but I doubt it. I still hope that CIG can improve their engine accordingly.

[@MrFurkettun]

I recently upgraded to the 7800X3D a few months ago but am still running an RX 470 4GB. Should I wait for the new GPUs to release before upgrading?

[@shh532]

I really think 1.0 is 2026-2027. Or at least in part, we will have a 4.X that feels very close to 1.0 (soft beta?) with most of the features shown off from 2023 and 2024, if not all the systems. It feels like a lot of this is driven by resources being freed up from Sq42 and meshing now letting them just make what they want. The systems are all much smaller than Stanton (1 LZ each) and they have a real line in the sand to aim for and unify the development behind. (Was great meeting you at citcon btw, outside the studio with Silvan)

[@widt94]

I saw the GI is already in the 3.24.2 build if you do the r_displayinfo which we usually use to see FPS you will see (r_) also shows GI settings

[@AcheliusDecimus]

They will aim for when SQ42 releases in case an influx of players comes from that. So 2026 - 2027 would be the most likely estimate, as they are bringing in crafting(base building) sooner than later. This is the most complex along with the economy which they are also planning to push soon(CIG soon). Still my estimate is 2035.

[@positronikiss]

2031 for 1.0

[@franklie960]

There are so many things they haven't talked about like bounty hunting, the Lorville rework, the inside of building in landing zones,... I was expecting to see something of that, but what we see was something different.

[@leinadreign3510]

Everything you see in the "Con" stuff is highly polished. If Im looking at how stuff "runs" on a server, it never does.

[@ntsarb]

I totally agree that CIG is several years away from delivering SC 1.0. "Dynamic Server Meshing", whatever you call it, is the pre-requisite for the MMO-scale experience CIG promised 10 years ago. If they haven't developed it already, this is because they don't have the required know-how. I hope CIG do make it, but 10 years to reach this points tells me that they probably won't.

[@Platinumsniper]

Keep in mind that the silhouettes are only "some" of what they plan to release. The suylen, F7 MkII and Sabre raven variants weren't in the silhouettes last year

[@derek9063]

I have been a backer since 2016 and this just took the wind out of my sails. I am not sure what would keep people interested in keep playing. In a lot of ways it just seems like they are just starting work now. 12 years of development, maybe six more years? Almost 20 years of development? Is this a game you are supposed to pass down to your kids? There just comes a point where all this just is silly.

[@CondemnedInformer]

SQ42 will be out 26/27 so hopefully the team will then move on to SC after further polishing SQ42 because, what update has CIG released that didn't need additional work and how much still does? So let's stay late 27 maybe 2028 after it's all said and done, so SC 1.0 will likely be 2030 at the earliest. Now, maybe they are able to focus more and more of the team onto SC, to me, too many resources are being eaten up by a single player experience we'll play once, could have just hired Infinity Ward and they would have got something surprisingly close out in 2-3 years. What we care about is SC, so seeing it be kinda 'second' on the priority list hurts.

[@RillUK]

If they don't release 1.0 with Squadron 42, so when you finish S42 you almost seamlessly end up online in the mmo, I think they're missing out on something really cool.

[@rubentaiartinger2640]

What do you think about shard degradation? Will static or dynamic meshing change our experience?

[@tenpoundfortytwo]

A very good question! In theory server meshing should help improve things, but I doubt the experience will be great in 4.0. I think we have to give them some time to get everything tuned up!

[@Libertas_P77]

Based upon the pace of delivery, I would expect Pyro and Nyx to be in next year, and Castro the year after with Terra in early 2026. That’s the minimum solar systems required just to meet one small aspect of readiness. With all the other facets including economic balance (if they’re really serious about no wipes from 1.0) and time required to TEST those economic changes and ensure hyper inflation doesn’t occur, I would estimate Star Citizen 1.0 for 2028 or 2029.

[@Mannerdm]

any intel 285k performance test on star citizen?

[@tenpoundfortytwo]

Well I was going to buy the i7, motherboard and some fast ram. But then I saw the reviews and thought it probably wasn't worth the £700's! I'll probably get it all though when there are some price cuts.

[@remzey01]

I will say as someone who has worked in games for quite some times. Some of them might be closer than you think. Sometimes certain areas like the ui and stuff that make it look good (and likely worth showing actual stuff) happens later, so some of the base form of what they need may be ready. They may just wait until more of the UI and logic is hooked up to show active use. Otherwise in a lot of cases the active use will look clunky and bad from a player prospective.

[@mechanix1228]

While I thought base building looked beautiful i was also at the same time depressed because that seems a long ways off. It did put me in the mood to play Satisfactory or Subnautica again just to scratch that base building itch the trailer gave me.

[@PeteAstbury-cl7xb]

I understand that the investors have the option to withdraw in 2028. It wouldn't surprise me if they're targeting 1.0 for then or at least to announce a release window by the 2028 CitCon. It would make sense for them to be internally targetting 1.0 for release to coincide with 2028 CitCon with the idea that if that target slips then they can at least be close enough that they can announce a release window with a relative amount of confidence by then.

[@emessar]

I mean, it just depends on if they change their minds again. in 2018 they said that 1.0 was essentially just a matter of tech and wasn't tied to any specific ships, gameplay, or a certain number of systems. The last piece of that tech was Dynamic Server Meshing. With static server meshing in testing and set to release later this year, that could have been in another year or two. Now, with all they've added, at least a couple more years. So end of 2028 if I'm being very optimistic. But 2029-2030 seems more realistic ... at least to me.

[@remzey01]

Also I think if we are saying when will we get finished feature x. That might be different than first implementation say. I would actually expect an early form of crafting to show up sooner. Then be updated and added too significantly later

[@1scrub2]

I'm a bit of the optimist, but when things are in greybox, and systems are thought through in a modular way that leverages a hierarchy or a scalable tack, I think it's gonna be about 2 to 3 years.

[@skorne7682]

I expect SQ42 will actually release in 2026. As for 1.0, I agree it is at least 5 years out, though no doubt we will see some things from citcon in the next 2 years. As an original backer with my little Aurora starter I watched the game evolve from the hangar module to Port Olisar and beyond. I spent a chunk of change on SC over the years, but at this point I'm looking to cash out and forget about the whole project. I came to the realisation that by the time of actual release I'm gonna be way too old and slow to be playing competitive multiplayer games. Hope you all get to enjoy it someday though.

[@Astro-M0]

This entire video is invalid as the times you're giving are in relation to how long they took to finish things in the past. However with all this new tech and server meshing the speed of the production of content should be ramped up by A LOT. Look at all that they've released in 3.24 and now they're optimistic to release 4.0 (Server meshing + Pyro) before the end of the year! You'd be ignorant to think they're going to be sending things out at the same pace as before.

[@CellDE]

i do believe pyro and nyx are still full ressource alignment, but stanton needs also an overhaul after planet tech v5 is final. so castra will come with 1.0 ... in couple of years. gosh couple of years, so it takes a decade for all planets ?! i hope not .

[@legatusnavium7060]

The fact that 1.0 doesn't include anything from SQ42, has me very worried.

[@pesto-boi]

I was looking at the development time of star citizen and I gotta say we are pretty lucky to see a launch of 1.0 within the next 4-6 years making a total development time of 16 to 18 years. The reason I say that is cause there's a few other games with even longer development times like kien for the Gameboy (22 years), along with Duke nukem (14 years) and beyond good and evil 2 (16 years)

[@diegobarriga8330]

Can someone explain exactly what greybox and whitebox means? How far in development are they?

[@etogreen]

Yeah, I was thinking the exact same thing when I saw citizencon. 5-10 years until 1.0 almost doesn't seem that crazy. Then again, maybe progress will speed up after server meshing and squadron's release.

[@Jameson004]

The sandworm looks like something out of Zelda 64. It just stays in one spot and burps rocks at you.

[@wdipuccio]

The guy that presented it went on saltemike’s stream right after his panel and said they only got it working 3 weeks before citcon. They will definitely do more to it before releasing it.

[@Accuracy158]

Honestly I think 1.0 is going to have to change a and morph a fair bit over the years. Particularly once players start to get their hands things and give feedback. It's not fully thought through yet but their are some interesting concepts. 8 years probably is a good time frame to see how things shape up.

[@galactichazzard8932]

Sure is pretty. Plenty of eye candy and dreams to attract money but I don't see anything happening in the next 7 to 10 years (if at all). And you'll still have people who have pledged ships in 2012/2013/2014/2015 still waiting on their ships in 2030. Not to worry though as people will still have a lot of new sh1t, I meant new ships to pledge. I'm also not too confident about SQ42 for 2026 as the date will probably change again. It's a looooooooooonnnnnnnnnnggggg polishing job.

[@HansangVibration]

the more i watched CitizenCon this year, the more "10 years" started to feel more real... I never backed the project, i'm just eager to play. Play a game. I won't pay anything until there is a game. Please make a fuck**g game!

[@tosca5463]

The thing is… what will they release this year then ? Because citcon 2023 was about 4.0 and we’re having it. I think we gonna have much more than we think. I feel like 1.0 will be there 2027.

[@tenpoundfortytwo]

Yeah this year is going to be really interesting! Hopefully we get some interesting stuff!

[@tree0311]

I think a lot of peoples "when" expectations are colored by past performance, which isn't an accurate predictor. Past performance was limited by production efforts being divided between the two games, with the limitations of core tech like PES and SM not being done, with a smaller studio than they have now, etc. Now we're not gonna see some order of magnitude change in development, but making comparisons using the past decade as evidence is a really poor argument. We're looking at a CIG of over 1300 people with only small strike teams polishing Squadron 42 and the core tech reaching a level of maturity that it isn't holding back the development of the rest of the game. They can get a lot more done than they have previously.

[@Jac70]

Server meshing should open the door for this stuff and that could be done in a year or two. All the other stuff, base-building, weather and 5 other planets. My guess would be 2028 at the earliest.

[@jaredlalal]

Server meshing even when it "comes out" will still need a ton of work continuously for a while

[@qtheengineer9483]

WE got to think also that most of the SQ42 team will probably get moved over to focusing on the PU also after SQ42 gets released so my guess is late 2025-early 2026 things in the PU will be working much faster.

[@mwittstrom]

I thought your guesses where pretty optimistic. My guess is 1.0 is at a minimum 5 years away. We will of course get lots of stuff in pathes until then but for the whole thing to come together, and more importantly to be stable and optimized.

[@capnsquirrel4017]

Very well presented! Thank you.

[@rgdeniro]

Really hope that even of its not 1.0, we'll have many patches that improves perfomances and adds more game "loops".

[@VerryJerry90]

It’s a space sim. I’m not at all surprised the timeline they’re taking to make a whole living universe. I mean open world games set on one world is one thing - this is a whole different scale

[@goself84]

Given the ships they've showed that they want in the next 12 months, I would assume Base building is also part of that 12-month plan

[@conquestor]

... My man, we're looking at 8 years at minimum. Things get more complex as development goes on, so progress gets slower over time and not faster.

Yep, tools etc make things easier and if they really can work in parallell then things will flow pretty nicely. In the end though you will have issues that touch many parts of the code and/or content. Those things will take ages to polish.

[@festersmith8352]

I can't imagine the complexity, reliance, and communication of the various gameplay teams, to make base building fully functional. BB team needs to know how the refining team is going to handle materials. Refining team needs to now how mining and salvage team are going to handle resources. Salvage team needs to hear from ship teams. Mining teams need in depth info from planet team. All teams polish there respective gameplay, only to have the planet team make a mistake or change their mind. The whole process goes kaka. This is one giant complex machine, running on humans, who are not perfect. I have learned a great deal watching this project for 12 years. And a different level of respect for those who use keyboard for their main tool at work.

[@StarshipCaptainNemo]

I think they will shock all of us if they get dynamic server meshing stable and then they be like "Tadaa! We were not idle while waiting for server meshing and we prepared some stuff already and here it is now." I think they will churn out content quarter after quarter with the improved tools and automation.

[@kn1ne]

To deliver everything they showed in 1.0 they need to get dynamic server meshing to work at scale. My guess is 5 years is optimistic. The more relevant question I think is what state the PU will be in when Squadron releases.

[@poet8236]

I honestly believe 1.0 with all the features proclaimed will be no earlier than 2050, and that's even a very positive guess looking at how little was accomplished in the past decade of what needs to be done to get there.

[@stuartthurstan]

If the studio can stay on it's feet for the next ten years without any of my money, then I would say that's a realistic timeframe for the 1.0 they outlined to become a fully polished product. Of course, whether or not they can stay on track for that long without feature creep and reworks of reworks is another issue entirely.

[@lukasz8487]

I'm looking forward to the Pyro Release but even Stanton is not finished yet. Where is the Aaron Halo Belt?

[@aviator2252]

What do you mean? I mine the belt daily since ground mining is borked

[@lukasz8487]

@@aviator2252 between Crusader and ArcCorp exist the Aaron Halo Belt. Its unpassable with QT Drive. You have to pass with normal speed the Aaron Halo Gateways. Thats the Lore.

[@aviator2252]

@@lukasz8487 i would be fine if that never comes in, i am fine with guessing a drop point and mining the halo as is, and in the future using scanning gameplay finding transient anomalies for sneaking in and out of Stanton. forcing anyone passing through the region into normal traversal, the aaron halo is 1626000m and at 300m/s for SCM your looking at 1:30:20 to travel through it to be able to jump to your destination. that is dumb and absolutely should by thrown out by cig, great lore, shitty gameplay

[@swetzel227]

When I started backing star citizen with money I got from Christmas in 2014, I was around 11 years old. In 5 days I will be legally allowed to drink and celebrating my 21st birthday with friends... by the time SC 1.0 is dropped, I may be almost 30.

[@SgtHack802]

Another thing I was wondering. Dry docks, Bengal Carrier, this will cost real money I would think. Maybe the size of the dry dock. Probably a $5000 ship for free? Also I think maybe 8 years

[@DanFrederiksen]

the surfaces look like the graphics engine blurs them a lot, it's very unsatisfactory to look at. have they addressed that look?

[@JoelBondoux]

I don't think you're too far off, but with base building, I wouldn't be surprised if we are able to build the basic homesteads by next Cit Con. After all, they are focusing on releasing base building ships before then. I know in the past they have given us ships without an in-game role, but their reason for not releasing the planned Legionnaire is they want to complete the scanning / hacking systems first. Perhaps this policy has changed for the better?

[@sumiral6438]

we saw many stuff but I cant think about anything that is near to release. So what are we really awaiting for 2025?