Is Star Citizen Taking The "Sim" Out of The Space Sim? | Launch Sequence Podcast

[@Liefx]

Thanks for having me on! Was great to get such a long chat with you

[@itesseracted]

o7

[@vrutu19]

Dude, you mentioned every single concern that I also have. I'm relieved that there are more people out there asking the right questions.

[@Liefx]

@@itesseracted o7

[@Liefx]

@@vrutu19 Glad I was able to cover your concerns! I love and believe in the project, but doesn't mean we shouldn't ask questions!

[@dugzino]

Well... It was REALLY weird to see you not hosting an RLCS event. Especially in a Star Citizen episode with SpaceTomato. Star Citizen shirt on your next RLCS appearance to prove this is the real Liefx. 🤣

[@LucidStrike]

The reason for glint is very, very simple: Snipers want 1-hit kill lethality, but the game design features permadeath. In a game where death is meaningful, lethality needs meaningful counters. If snipers are going to be 1HK-capable, CIG needs to give players a boosted chance of avoiding that scenario. If snipers weren't 1HK-capable, this wouldn't be necessary, as the first shot would BE the warning and opportunity. I think anti-glint folks largely just haven't fully processed Death of a Space Man and are thinking about this like it's Battlefield, ARMA, or some other game where death isn't all that meaningful.

[@festersmith8352]

Its not like its OP. You have to be looking directly at it to see it. And I almost never take a look around before leaving my ship. Though I don't often go places I would likely be sniped either. I suppose if I thought it was the right situation for a sniper to be camped, I might be a little more cautious. Ground battle.

[@ParagonFangXen]

Personally? Requiring food and water is okay with me. Not as often as right now. It should take a full day of gameplay to require your character to eat, and half that time to drink ideally. So 24 and 12 hours each seems reasonable to me. Bathrooms should only be a joke option that is never forced, and the way they intend to "require" showers makes sense to me. If you are a down and dirty trader, engineer, gunnery agent, drop troop, showering will not and should not matter. If you wanna build reputation within Luxury or Personal Transport gameloops, or care about making your character model look clean, i like showers as intended i think.

[@ParagonFangXen]

Whoops that was meant as a response to someone! XD I will leave it anyway in case it prompts discussion, but imma copy/paste it to the proper comment too

[@txsicshooter]

My character doesn't need to poop so why eat? Also in suit water systems are ususally mixed into current day flight suits which begs the queston why water bottles.

[@ParagonFangXen]

@@txsicshooter for flight suits, that may indeed be a feature, they have said there will be different bonuses to different focussed undersuits and armors, so that makes sense for combat and racing pilots suits, but for everyone else thats likely a reasonable trade off. The answer though, as much as you dont like it and disagree with it, is that, to a point, detail matters for emersion. Eating and drinking are long observed "survival" mechanics in gaming, and as entire gameloops will depend on food and water consumption as part of their systems, we, as a community if not always as individuals, choose to accept those mechanics because in the end it benefits more people than it hinders. It sucks, but the answer is, pooping aint normalized, but eating, drinking, sleeping, and aesthetic upkeep all are. The toilets are just a nice cherry on top

[@AlkaloidMushrooms]

U can go 100% plus x5 +++++ whit fruit or energy drink then u are ok in roc mining too

[@merc9nine]

You need to drink in real life far more often than you need to eat. You can go a 8-21 days without food. You can barely go 3 days without water before your organs start to shut down. No one can go more than 5-6 days without water

[@ianwilson4286]

37 years in the Army and tours of Afganistan - how do you prepare for a sniper? If you have a fix please tell all the armies in the world that lose members to snipers. Also in a game bring a medic, so the sniper can shot them? The glint is only when aiming down sight, getting killed over and over again to a sniper would cause a lot of players to rage quit. Sniper sits at places that sell cargo and just kills pilots over and over. CIG must do something to stop the sniper meta, glit is step one but add round drop, sight deviation, windage. make it hard to be a sniper! In real life it is hard to be a sniper, bring that to the game.

[@lordfraybin]

Aimbots resolve that issue...

[@beardedlonewolf7695]

The glint is to dissuade campers taking down 5 players at 500m, I don't know how this guy doesn't get it? maybe that's how he usually plays in shooters. Snipers exist IRL for exactly that reason but it's much harder to hit a target at this distance than in a video game, without glint we'd have a bunch of snipers crawling on mountains at 500m waiting for their target, no one likes campers.

[@festersmith8352]

If the glint argument keeps being used with realism involved. I wanna add that spotting a sniper in RL is a lot more different than spotting 1-3 pixels (depending on resolution) on a two dimensional screen. Even if the sniper was wearing white armor in a green environment, the pixels are likely going to render in black at some point in the distance. I can live with glint. It takes a very fine and specific set of rules to spot it. First one is to be aware of it. Second one is to be looking for it (something I never do). Then there is more.

[@BenEmigh]

When I first got excited about SC it wasn't because we would get a realistic space simulator, it was because the space genre is so fantastic and unexplored. I was excited to see what creations CIG could produce that felt new and fresh. I never wanted realism to get in the way of that creativity or it would pigeonhole the project. If they wanted to focus on realism, a single puncture in the hull of a ship would cause you to depressurize and die. Gunfights in a space suit wouldn't last more than a single bullet. That's not fantastic, that's boring. CIG needs to care less about realism and simply focus on making a fun space game. The recent changes with loading cargo and inventory management worry me that they are making the game more tedious rather than just improving the game with better interfaces and functionality. The end of 30ks (for the most part) was a huge step in the right direction. No longer do I have to only focus on quick tasks out of fear I will lose all progress but I can slow down and enjoy the views and content of the game like never before. There lies another problem, much of the content only has surface-level depth or they don't do enough to highlight the depth of a system. The core missions are rinse and repeat while the unique missions are hidden behind a Red Unverified toggle that makes people nervous to attempt them. Star Citizen is not a bad game but the progress toward improvement is by all measures the slowest I have ever witnessed in the industry. As a fan, 1.0 can't come soon enough but we all know it would benefit from waiting a lot longer. CIG treats this project like a newborn baby. Once you are born you start the countdown towards death. I think they believe as long as the project stays in the womb it can never die. I just hope I don't die before this project is finally born. NPCs would make the game experience much better. From mounting my turrets so I don't have to find 9 friends to fly a hammerhead to helping load cargo. You could improve the game experience overnight if you allowed people to play ships the way they were designed to be played. Instead, CIG is leaning more into content that relies on multi-crew capabilities like engineering and fire suppression, forcing me into only flying small and medium ships solo. That is a mistake and will push many players away.

[@ivanbluetarski9071]

you do know self sealing fuel tanks were in use in the 1940,s right ?

[@BenEmigh]

​@@ivanbluetarski9071 I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make? Self-healing fuel tanks aren't actually self-healing, they're just rubber liners that slow the fuel leak until it can make it back to the airfield and be properly repaired. That's great if you have small pin-sized holes but doesn't work if you're being pelted by large ballistic cannons. I don't care for realism. I care about having fun in the game.

[@ivanbluetarski9071]

@@BenEmigh set in the distant future those systems will be far superior to those last century , infact they already are today . and as for your style of game there are thousands if not millions that suit your style of game . why down grade this to one of those ?

[@BenEmigh]

​@@ivanbluetarski9071 Well if we're going to discuss theoretical systems that don't exist, then everything is unrealistic and that just furthers my point. If we want to talk about the possibilities of the future, then I should have NPCs manning my turrets, heck they should be fully automated with AI. ballistic rounds should disintegrate when they hit our energy shield or bounce off like a space shuttle hitting Earths atmosphere at the wrong angle. We shouldn't need fuel because we've unlocked fission power. Also, where's teleportation? Travel should be instant... My point is you and I want different games but your reasoning for what you desire is built on your own bias, not reality. let's just call it what it is, we have two different versions of what we want this game to be. I don't want the game to feel like I'm at an arcade, but I also don't want it to feel like a job.

[@nuanil]

That would put you in the minority. Like the 1% minority, because we all expected a magnum opus of a space flight simulation.

[@jamesduffill7404]

It is striking a nice balance between SIM and fun gameplay. Realism can create a grind that makes it feel like work. We play these games to relax not work again, so I think they are trying to make it appeal to more people but also be FUN. When deeper systems come in like base building and new cargo, this conversation will die down. There isnt enough gameplay at the moment so this seems like a larger issue.

[@latjolajban81]

Sim or realism doesn't necessarily make a game less fun.

[@Schmeeda-wt9wm]

Nor does it necessarily make the game more fun​

[@latjolajban81]

@@Schmeeda-wt9wm True. But they sold the game as a sim. Not call of duty.

[@Schmeeda-wt9wm]

@@latjolajban81 if it was becoming call of duty they'd be working to lower TTK. Stop pretending theyre making it call of duty. That's a totally disingenuous comparison and it's completely outside the realm of reality. CIG trying to make flight have a lower bar of entry and making fps combat more fun (recoil changes, and scoping effects) isn't call of duty ffs.

[@Schmeeda-wt9wm]

Making SC waste players time through inconvenience only for the sake of realism will always be a bad idea. Games very often change over the course of their development. CIG wouldn't be the first company that modified their vision for a game especially as they begun to grapple with the realities of game development versus game ideation. Something that sounds fun on paper like DOaS is a very different story once you actually begin to think about how it would work, which can soon lead a dev team to go "hey maybe that idea we had ten years ago when we still thought we'd have 100 star systems at release and a million other pie in the sky features needs to be reevaluated" .

[@sidewithwerewolves]

Everyone talks about wanting hardcore Star Citizen but they're not playing "hardcore games" like Stalker, Hunt Showdown, Caves of Qud, Dwarf Fortress, Wyrm Online, Dark Age of Camelot, Ultima Online, Mortal Online, Eve Online (hardcore aka niche games). For every "hardcore" or "casualness" debate Star Citizen the debaters admit they've not put any minutes into these games because "they're not fun", aka too hardcore. Genre isn't gameplay and the scifi/fantasy elements will not save a game with poor gameplay. If SC went "hardcore" most of the loudest voices would quit in a week as it wouldn't be fun. Most players will not leave the safe zone and everyone runs around naked for pvp because no one wants to lose the time spent to grind loot. Too many mmos and large player games have proven this over the last 25 years. The calls for hardcore or sim only imagine it in a single vertical of gameplay not in its totality of pve/pvp logisitcs v combat v social. All the current "sim" games only use a single gameplay loop/mechanic to simulate. They will cite Arma and Tarkov but not chores of My Summer Car or Pressure Washer Simulator or the logistics hassle of Workers and Resources: Soviety Republic. If SC is a full sim, there has to be talk about in game "chores" and the regular busy work. A sim space ship game means that after every time you fly your Anvil Arrow for an hour it will take a week or more of maintenance before it can fly again -- you know like real life fighter jets; a true simulation. Fun gameplay is casual compared to real life. No one wants busy work or chores, they want puzzles and problems to solve and social interaction with a sense of progression to get a bit of adrenaline and dopamine. If SC went hardcore sim most people would be playing the life of an NPC not a cool spaceman running around a solar system.

[@namaikikitsune]

Right difficult/hardcore games are fairly niche. Fairly small populations of players play ARPG hardcore modes for instance. In terms of immersion, there's tons of mods for Skyrim and FO that do that kind of thing but how many people actually use them? I mean being able to bathe and do laundry is a cool concept but but is that level of detail appealing to a large number of players? At least for the Creation Engine games these are opt in mods.

[@Schmeeda-wt9wm]

Space Tomato should interview you. Actually discuss realism with someone who disagrees with you! Realism is a terrible idea and needs to be nipped in the butt.

[@zachanator2011]

If hard games are so niche why is elden Ring so popular. Lol it's not about it being hard it's about it being rewarding

[@namaikikitsune]

Why don't more games have hardcore mode then like I mentioned? Why aren't the new XCOM games as hard as the originals? Sure games like Monster Hunter and God Eater are still popular and are "challenging" but they aren't Roguelikes. How many players have defeated all the bosses in Elden Ring btw? From the achievements it looks like less than 50% Which I guess isn't uncommon since many people buy games and hardly play them but it just highlights that just because a game is popular doesn't indicate the level of enjoyment or fulfillment it provides.

[@XxTavoRxX]

See, this is where I differ in that when you guys talk hardcore, all you think about is combat and PvP or even PvE combat. Most sims aren't combat related, mmo's are more often than not, but sims aren't. Trucking sims, farming sims, world building sims. They are more about building economies, growing things, industry stuff for the most part. They don't have to be insane down to the last detail real, they just have to have more than log in to a ship and start fighting. Arena commander is for that. I think that's where there is confusion because it seems like half the players think only combat and the other half want to do industry and explore

[@ShadowGirl-]

About lives, imagine a bar and the more you resurrect the lower that bar goes until you "die", but spending time alive without dying begins to regenerate the bar. It would encourage people to pirate sometimes and be a good person other times when they don't want to be at risk.

[@christremelling4340]

One of my most visceral experiences in SC was during the early Tessa missions, there were no markers. One mission was to find a black box beacon, I was traveling around searching until suddenly I heard static over the radio and a scratchy signal, depending on my orientation and distance the sound would come and go, eventually I could see the red light and home in. The immersion - complete. I hope that they return to that level of game play. Perhaps Stanton or other systems are easier with markers etc, but go to pyro or more risky systems and there is less of the hand holding.

[@festersmith8352]

Oh good lord! I remember that frustration. It was awesome! I really hope they bring back Tessa as a random voice encounters in space. Something like a conspiracy theorist that hacks radio comms to send you on wild missions to do for her. A story arc where you can learn more about her by visiting locations she once inhabited. But you never get to meet her. Or maybe you do as an end game. Her character can be an awesome mystery in the verse. And yes, there are way to many easy mode markers in the game currently.

[@latjolajban81]

Implementing a hit marker/kill marker isn't making the game complete. It's making a quake version of Star Citizen.

[@bystander85]

I absolutely loved the idea of certain QoL being itemized or mission based. Like you can have auto-pilot or assisted landing but that's a ship module that maybe the starter ships get but if you want to min max your other capabilities when you're more proficient you can remove those devices. Or you can have a mission where the location has sensor jammers and your FPS scan/minimap doesn't work, or the bounty has armour that is undetectable on on scanners.

[@TheRyanK]

I think how SIM something is in a sci-fi game is how conceivable it is

[@Rift_Hawkman]

Food and water are fine, I don't see an issue with those. However hygiene is a little ridiculous unless implement properly. IMO the RIGHT way to do it is when we get radiation or toxic areas that require a specific suit, you should clean ur self to a degree. However this also should be balance to a degree. That would be a big annoyance so the reward for going into those areas should be big. At the same time, again in my opinion the only ships with showers should be the exploratory type, like my Hull C doesnt need a shower its focus should be cargo or at least have shower tiers or something. Now if im just an avg joe going around then no thats too much. Insurance imo is also fine, that restricts people spamming ships or just not caring to a degree about losing their ship or it being destroyed. Rn the focus should be progression and interaction not realism. Let me have cooler suits or a cooler hangar or even a discount toward companies I have a good rep with as a start. Have a "job" ask system where I pick from mining or cargo or bounty and depending on my pick I get a bonus or reward for doing things in that field. Even incentivize them to a degree like people who picked mining are the only ones that can set their location to stations with a refinery . Being a pirate allows you to set Grim as ur spawn but you void ur career pick completely. Like I like that everyone can do everything but I think the struggle is that there isn't a clear path its just overlap. Like what would be cool when we have bigger lobbies is an interaction that miners can have with someone who does cargo, like instead of the one who mines sells it to the cargo hauler, and the cargo hauler sells it. And when cargo missions become a thing I think it would be cool to see how if I need Iron i can buy it off of someone who mined it instead of just going to a terminal it gives another path. Same with a salvager. Found cargo on salvage? pawn it off to a cargo hauler. If this is done right you could have separate stations meant for trades like this around the system. Maybe its crazy but I think the game would thrive more if there was more player interaction instead of terminal interactions.

[@wenerjy]

The problem with the "realism" in the FPS mechanics of the game is that from a gameplay loop perspective it is the polar opposite of the space combat mechanics of the game, which tends to have a long TTK (time to kill). Super low TTK in FPS clashes quite heavily with the long TTK of space and is a jarring experience. I think the FPS experience should be made more fun with a higher TTK as well, and CIG can invent sci-fi reasons for why this is the case (personal shields, protective drones, etc.).

[@mariusdmeridius6712]

I disagree with LiefX regarding what pay to win means. In my opinion, pay to win refers to a situation in which an item that could give a player an advantage over another player cannot be obtained in any other way than by purchasing it for real money. Every item in Star Citizen that could give a player an advantage over another player can be obtained by simply playing the game.

[@joeggrant406]

The F8A would like a word

[@TheJack4000111]

Looking forward to getting my own Hanger

[@Vioblight]

Same once it’s done being delayed again and again

[@rolinthor]

Why? Do you have a coat on the floor of your closet or something?

[@ivanbluetarski9071]

@@rolinthor maybe ??? could be a favorite pair of shoes or some thing else collected from some strange new world

[@LievenSerge]

There is a history of spacesime games that defined the genre, they are not based on realism in every aspect but have a very common approach on certain traits/rules. Spacesims usually have a very deep economy and (in most cases) a flight model that is more between airplane and spacecraft rather than realistic to mention 2 of these traits. I think 'Squad' in the last years is a great example for becoming more casual and approachable from what it was back when it started as a Battlefield 2 mod without losing its core or its attraction to the original player base. This is mainly achieved by a smartly and cleanly crafted UI.

[@Justin-v9r]

I'd say that the "perfect" space sim would replicate real life at a 1:1 scale, but that's clearly impossible. The major point I'd like to make is that, since you NEED to pick and choose which aspects of real life make it into your sim, TRY to pick as few of the tedious ones as you can... Chris.

[@FreebirthBoccara]

I think to many people assume realism means limiting yourself to modern concepts of technology. Nothing about the game is non newtonian. Ships arent "banking in space" they are just using their thrusters to alter their direction. Yes. Those thrusters are extremely powerful. Thats why we dont have to fly like they do in the expanse. Because we arent limited to the technology of today.

[@bhz8499]

Going more and more casual will make long term player retention a problem…. There’s a reason CoD etc is bi-annual releases…. Arma and helldivers 2 should be who we are after as a player base

[@TheNefariousFox]

Dev's should NEVER dumb a game down for day one players. They need to be intelligent and make systems which create a path towards mastery for noobs. Killing depth is stupid mode, and guarantees a dead game in a month. Dev's need to be willing to add in casual elements, and then realize those elements are too easy mode and remove them for difficulty balance. So that the depth is still there months later.

[@IrisCorven]

This. The players they wanna pull in are not Summit and his fans. Those type jump to a new shooter every 2-6 months. If they're banking on that kind of audience, instead of an eventual subscription model for the niche playerbase they have? They're barking up the wrong tree for perpetual support. They need an EVE player base, not a CoD/Valorant player base.

[@FreebirthBoccara]

Dude.. what are you smoking comparing helldivers to arma? Helldivers is more cod then cod is...

[@IrisCorven]

@@FreebirthBoccara He probably means in terms of live service, not gameplay.

[@joshua41175]

​@IrisCorven but Arma isn't live service, it just has a really dedicated fan base.

[@attieable]

Gonna try and be constructive. Many older backers that bought into SC pre 3.0 was sold a certain game and implied a certain game by cig. Many of these backers were older gamers gushing at the prospect of a game that would help them live out that Star Trek, Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Firefly and Dark Matter fantasies. Not a Sim as such but and immersive adjacent to something believible in reference to those shows. A long term game to practice and get better in. These lastest changes are severely geared towards shorter attention gamers. Medical URSA was purely for sales and to target newer backers. Many players have invested in exspensive HOTAS/HOSAS setups to make it more immersive. But MM was totally made for mouse and keyboard players. Lots can be said about gatekeeping with HOTAS/HOSAS, but this to a large degree indicates the type of player. The guy willing to buy these Devices for SC exclusively are in for the long haul. But MM nuked movement to hell. Inta respawn and hand holding is moving towards something less immersive and "adjacent to realism". Its to attract the fortnite player and this is concerning. Because lets face it ,except for a very few examples these games are very "seasonal" to the short attention span player.

[@niklasdahlgren7641]

This, a space *combat* sim as they were named and presented in Star Wars, X-Wing, Wing Commander etc.

[@seanLeprechaun]

I'd go one step further and say that many space simmers also play MS Flight simulator which means we're flying space games with our cockpits, not just HOTAS but all kinds of gear. iPads, Stream Decks, rudder pedals, touch screens, physical buttons. I don't want RSI to prioritize support for these things but I hope they're somewhere on the road map. Just an API that would allow 3rd party software to read data from the sim and set the state of certain switches would be enough. Community members would write the intervening software.

[@ChookyChuck]

I think master modes and the atmospheric flight model are very arcady. Yet so many mundane task are simulated. Just my opinion. That said there are aspects of the game that are amazing and that's what keeps me coming back.

[@wannahit9357]

Star Citizen has always been sold as a space SIM! All you gotta do is look up the video, star citizen what is it? from 11 years ago and it straight up says it within the beginning titles.

[@FillenNaymeer]

As others have said here its all about balance, a "sim" doesnt have to be unfun. Cigs initial pitch seems a bit extreme to me But the core unforgiving gameplay, if you do away with dna degradation and death of a spaceman stuff, is just how it handles respawn mechanics and travel times And i dont think too many people have a problem with respawn locations being limited to advanced tier 3 medical facilities that will only be located on large ships and stations. Depending on who controls a region they may have reputational barriers to bar access as well If people think the game needs to be more casual i dont think anyone means to do away with that. But i think them doing away with stuff like shower requirements and bathroom stuff is pretty whatever. Like no one cares that much about that The nature of long travel times and limited respawn points though, those are key elements of the game. Those could lead to alot of the gameplay in the future. It adds home field advantage if youre allied with an org or faction with nearby medical facilities, and more risk for striking out into unfriendly regions The areas i think they need to make more friendly are the house keeping aspects. We live 800 years in the future, give us space amazon. Which im guessing will be the freight elevators and inventory kiosks. Im hope those have a shop option. I want to be able to do everything exceot respawn in my hanger. At more remote or legally meh locations standard shops still work. But otherwise let me look at my contracts, decide on a job, buy what i need, load up my ship, and head out. All from my hanger

[@LucidStrike]

As this is a "universe sim", CIG is focusing on the TOTAL experience - that is, the way that the various systems compound. Keeping that in check requires smoothing out the edges of each system to some degree.

[@rsanchez6832]

So many things covered here i dont even know where to start😂. I agree with LIEFX on the whole sniper recon scenario. A realistic system like that would make soo much sense and would add so much. Example: sending out a team to do security sweeps or patrol around your base because of the lack of blips. I personally dont find it realistic even right now that one person can go into bunkers and clean house. It should be hard where it needs to be a team involved. Legends would be the ones that clear it on their own like john wick. On the subject of things not being too grindy, some gameloops should be grindy. For a couple of reasons. Lets use space trucking as an example, I personally would love to spend time organizing my cargo bay coinciding with my drop offs. Admiring my ship that type of gameloop will make you appreciate the small things. Like CIG has put soo much work in these ships for what? For players to just run to their pilot seat? It being grindy will encourage truckers to hire a hand or two. A great gameloop for beginners that are looking to make some money and learn the ropes. Then other gameloops like space bounties should be quick, get in your cockpit and blast them. Players should be okay with some gameloops not being for them in my opinion. Dont put all gameloops in a median. Some should be grindy others should be faster pace It helps people find their niche 🤔

[@Tiyrant]

Sim vs. Arcade isnt something that I see set in stone. Its like if we compare Warthunder to DCS. Both are described as 'simulators', but one is significantly more complex and 'realistic' than the other. It becomes a moving target, based on the persons own perception of when something is sufficiently 'complex'. I wouldn't describe Star Citizen as a traditional simulator. If it truly was, we'd be taking part in beyond visual range, railgun and missiles flinging matches, tapping thrusters to make small trajectory adjustments. But that's fine, I dont want Star Citizen to be that. I think as long as something gives the perception of being at least somewhat grounded in reality, and as you say - is constrained by its own rules consistently. Then that should be enough. I think Chris is aiming for a game where the average person could look at what's going on, using modern mainstream Sci-fi as a point of reference, and say "yeah I can believe that". But I think that might end up burning a lot of people, who backed with different expectations. I also think they're going to be planning a lot of gameplay around time vs. reward. A lot of the gameplay people descibe simply wont be feasible for the average persons gameplay session length. I think we've seen this shift with the respawn changes.

[@festersmith8352]

I often wonder how many that want it to be as complex and simmy as possible, hit the flight ready key, instead of the individual keys to power on the ship systems. I wouldn't mind the very complex sim it could be (DCS complex). But I'll also admit, I will likely learn to cut any corner I can to avoid the complexity. I have a button box mapped with all the power options. But I'm always hitting flight ready. I imagine everyone does/will. They either don't notice it, or won't admit it.

[@bhz8499]

The Sim was supposed to be space flight; it’s in the original pitch for kickstarter. Laser and tractor beams aren’t at issue. It’s the flight model…. And it’s no longer a Sim… 🤷‍♂️ sorry

[@heretic739]

Pvp =/= realistic. Murder and griefing IRL exists, but it's an exception. Video games take the IRL consequences out so it becomes common. A realistic game would be filled with far more cooperation and people acting like a citizen of a society than not. I think we need to separate from the idea that "realism = doing whatever dark impulse you can think of to break a system."

[@XxTavoRxX]

^this here, it's the point I've been trying to make, there are no consequences so murder, killing, stealing become common .

[@RareCandyTCG]

I just want the game to be immersive all the way up until gameplay elements become unnecessarily tedious as a result of it.

[@EvanKotler]

I think once they hit 1.0 they’ll start licensing out Star Engine to other developers for continued revenue.

[@MidnightWolfSDJ]

When it comes to sniper glint I have a wait and see mentality about it. If it becomes an issue then sure I would like to have it removed. But if it is a set in stone thing, then I would say at least come up with a way snipers can counteract glint. My suggestion is binoculars that don’t have glint. It would still be a gamified mechanic but it would give functionality to binoculars. Binoculars could be a way that snipers could scope out the area and time their aiming and shooting when everyone in the area is facing a different direction. This means you rely on skill, preparation, and a bit of luck (you don’t know when someone will turn to look in your direction) to accomplish the task. Binoculars wouldn’t have a means of firing a weapon. But they allow snipers the ability to be secure in their location if they are skilled enough. I’ve also considered the idea of binoculars pinging enemies within line of sight to your hud (and party hud) but that might make the binoculars op. Still might be worth trying out though!

[@Qbertqueso]

The conversation of "is SC a space sim or not" is so frustrating. If you look up Space sim games they all play differenty. And none of the space sims play like simulators like: piloting, trucking, racing, farming etc simulators. Liefx's definition of a space game doesn't even exist. There is no game that plays like how the Expanse series is portrayed.

[@wmouse]

Need to stop using the word “simulator” because its meaning is too muddled. Strictly speaking there is no real simulation of space or atmospheric flight in Star Citizen. Not even close. MM or not. It’s not even relevant to whether SC (or MM) is good or not.

[@JClif]

Great conversations. I like the tough questions and the discussions. At the end of the day, I am so excited for this game and I love keeping up with its development. Thanks

[@ShadowGirl-]

I like the changes they have added. I think Sniper Glint will be super important to us when the death of our character is so penalizing. But the masses cannot see very far into the future, they need to have faith.

[@xanderh2404]

The question at the start ("what is a space sim") has an objective answer, and neither of you got close. What Liefx describes isn't a space sim at all, in fact. He's describing a space simulator, not a space sim. The word "space sim" is a video game genre, and a well established one at that. It goes all the way back to the first x-wing and tie fighter games, as well as Elite and Wing Commander. It's characterised by direct control of the ship as if it was an airplane, and typically features dogfighting, but a few have other game loops as their focus (or even a side thing). It was basically a sub-genre of flight sims. Kerbal Space Program is not a space sim. A more accurate descriptor would be "rocketry simulator". It barely shares any characteristics at all with other space sims.

[@LucidStrike]

Yeah, some people conflate 'simulation' and 'realism'. Simulations don't require realism - Simulations require verisimilitude. They only need to be highly internally consistent, rather realistic or not.

[@atomicpsycho1589]

These videos are great! I love the nuance of the discussions with other people that are into Star Citizen!

[@thepurpleperp4564]

Manual cargo loading is a step forward for piracy as well. You'll either be sitting places for longer on planet sites, or you'll have more people involved for shorter times. Either one presents opportunity for different types of piracy.

[@ikkeheltvanlig]

Here are some helpful definitions: _opposites_ Sim / simulation: skill in the game can be translated to skill doing the same in real life and vise versa. Arcady: game mechanisms are made convenient for the interface and other gaming conventions like timeframe, simplicity, variations etc. _opposites_ Realistic/immersive: design aimed at letting you feel you're actually there, doing the thing Fun design: design aimed at entertainment value other than immersion, for example artistic visual and sound effects, difficulty curves etc. _opposites_ Hardcore: unforgiving gameplay, punishing adversity, steep learning curves, permanent or severe consequences. Casual: forgiving gameplay, comfortably scaled adversity, beginner friendly learning curve and guides, consequences you can deal with or live with.

[@jedi_drifter2988]

IMO if SC turns into a kerbal type space sim, CIG will lose 2/3 if not more of their backers/players. They must find a balance between fun and realism.

[@xXE4GLEyEXx]

Realism leaves the room as soon as you fire a laser weapon in-game. The laser goes pew and travels... Yeah no. Love the game and am one of the weirdos who likes where MM takes us. I just hope they nail it down and make it polished down the line.

[@seanLeprechaun]

The more realistic you make a space sim, the less fun it would be. There are vast distances to travel. Distances we can't even fathom as humans. Most planets would be completely uninhabitable. Space is full of things that would instantly kill us. What I want is a ship I can control with real controls, multi-monitor support for immersion (when I play MSFS, I have six screens. Three for the view and three I use to pop out MFDs onto). I think we're going to see how arduous and boring it is when we have to deal with cargo in 3.24. Will it be it more "real"? Yes. But I mean, do we really want SecondLife Space? As it is, it's very difficult to sign into this game and play for an hour or two after work. I spend most of that time just getting to my damn ship! Why do I spawn in a hotel room, then face an elevator, run, train, run, another elevator, terminal (wait wait wait), another elevator, run, (many doors in my ship because I have to board in the back) to get seated in the cockpit? Surely this could be done better. Cities of the future don't build the hotels near the space stations? And I can't even control the cargo door of my ship from my ROC. We've had garage door openers since the 1970's.

[@IrisCorven]

My main issue with MM is that the balance passes weren't done before release. So many ships fly the same, regardless of aerodynamic profile, mass, etc. And for me, it's killed my want to fly day-to-day and cargo ships, because most of them just feel unfun to fly now. My combat ships? Feel great! Combat's super fun, when it's not boiling down to a nose-to-nose DPS race. But the average flight experience, when I felt "in the zone" escaping pirates, or hauling ass in my C1 at ground level? Just feels gone. It doesn't feel thrilling anymore. And my Cutter shouldnt be able to break atmos just as well as my Aurora or Arrow. Once ship roles are fleshed out, and every ship has its "feel" back, I'll be fine with it. But as for hitmarkers, respawning, glint, etc... Glint should be situational, based on lighting position. Reward the sniper for being prepared in choosing a spot, reward the player for checking and covering those angles. Respawn being simple and quick in alpha due to the bugs is fine with me, but there does need to be a cost/limiting factor past a broken "distance check" like we have now eventually. Don't make people wait 20 minutes for a medic, but make them aware taking that shortcut can have consequences. Make sure they know it's a free pass for so long, but only with a consumable resource, someone has to man the medbed, etc. Like Liefx says - We were sold on decisions and preparations mattering, years ago. Peparation should be rewarded, and being loose and irresponsible should have a cost. Running or fighting should be a major choice, piracy and risking death should be a major choice. When we have engineering, ships can be repaired in space, fuel can run out, etc? We should be weighing going whole hog on trying to blow someone up, and if we can handle the aftermath. Cargo is a huge deal with me, as a cargo runner. I pledged knowing thats what I wanted - To run cargo, to smuggle, to supply other players when they finally need supplies. I wanted that feeling of gritty day-to-day, reliable space trucker, and the work that comes with it. I didn't want to press a button and have magic cargo. I've waited YEARS for cargo to be something fully physicalized, and for my job to be immersive and take planning and time. And as it stands, a lot of the whining I hear is coming from Pirates and Bounty farmers who are angry there'll be an extra step before they can get back to pew-pewing for their monetary bonus. And sorry - thats part of cargo. You already load the cargo, you have to unload the cargo. Don't want to take the time to do that? Make smaller trips with smaller cargo ships when your group does piracy, take the best goods, make less work for yourself, or pay to have it unloaded. And that goes back to my temp med change statement - I don't think anyone who backed this game from the start should have their gameloop dumbed down for the sake of players who don't have the attention span to stick with the game for more than 2 months, when some of us have stuck with a hangar module/AC/alpha PU for years. Ease while bugs persist, or while mechanics are unfinished is fine. But ultimately you need depth to these systems to make them last. If you aren't onboard for consequence, or taking 5 minutes of your time to load/unload your ship, then you need to weigh if this is the kind of game for you. People who paid for a med ship to play space paramedic, or a Caterpillar to be a space trucker shouldn't have to see their gameplay become two button presses to satiate players who don't want to engage with those systems at all, past the benefit it gives them in their gameloop. If we're beholden to being shot by you at anytime? You're beholden to us when it comes to treatment and supplies.

[@Bigpopp1]

As far as med beds go I think maybe it’s to help some of us bear the many bugs in the game. Not the only way to do it but maybe it’s simple for now available until a later date when they can iron out bugs and instability. Maybe that’s when they plan to change what these new abilities are capable of. Idk

[@pynksalmon4472]

w/ revives... it think it would be cool to steal the "respawn ages you one year older" from Sifu, + injuries dont heal on revive... and a medic needs to treat your wounds after you revive before your back in action

[@joshua41175]

See this is where I disagree with the anti-glinters. It's not like scope glint doesn't exist and the glint is not incredibly bright or omnipresent like it is in battlefield for example. It's pretty subtle and you can easily compensate by attacking from the direction of the sun or not sitting directly in front of the enemy base with you're weapon out the entire time. It'll be interesting if some helmets come with magnifying optics like the macflex helmets, maybe this will appease some of the more hard-core players because even though scope glint is real, it's rarely useful.

[@Neil-teamBrigade]

Sim. Simulation. A Simulation of space. No question, SC is not a space sim. And thank God - it'll be boring if it were. Star Citizen: A futuristic MMORPG sandbox universe.

[@niklasdahlgren7641]

Afaik they have stated that after the game is "released" only starter packages will be sold and new concept ships will be sold ONCE.

[@festersmith8352]

Got a link to that official statement?

[@bjordan429]

17:51 - Changing the rules 'ex machina', kinda like how SC AI dont fly the same ships as players. They still detect players under different rules, and maneuver under different tuning. Dont believe me? Fight an AI redeemer, and wonder how it keeps pilot guns on you at all times. Yup, I agree with your statement, it makes players upset. 18:23 - Or like when Marketing doesn't talk with the devs. And Marketing portrays a future without DoaSm, then the Devs reinforce DoaSm in the next official video. 22:40 - Nail on the head. 30:18 - Or instead of sniper glint to balance as if its CoD; to defeat snipers, have dropships with lookdown sensors, or the hornet tracker, or bounty hunting ships, or the cutlass red, be able to detect people on the ground with sensors meant for this. Sensors that improve gameplay for these ships; so as a counter, they use the full game rather than separating FPS as if this were Elite. Thats the level of immersion that I expected. For now, it could even just be an entity flag for these ships' sensors. If they wanted to put work into it, it could be a 'ground mode' for certain radars. If they got fancy, it could be managed by the copilot. So rather than balance through nerfing snipers, you balance through adding purpose to ships and buffing game loops. Glint is just disappointing as it comes across as lack of vision, or just laziness. 32:05 - Well said; I agree, it detracts from the stated development philosophy. Also a good example of how impactful hit markers are, look at Insurgency vs common FPS games. 32:30 - Exactly, the kill markers feel satisfying instantly...like a mobile game. 33:20 - Against NPCs, see my previous comment on sensors and looking at the full picture and not just handheld guns. Reward preparation: Look before you leap. Scan before you land. 42:16 - nice breakdown for cost/benefit. I'm going to borrow this argument. 44:34 - True it doesnt have a real comparison to life, but back to your earlier point, as long as they give a reason, set a rule, and follow that rule for similar instances (whatever they may be in the future), I think people will be fine with it. Personally, I view it as a power consumption issue, or some conflict with how the drive achieves FTL, requiring them to be down for some safety issue. But as you said before, lets see how it matches up when they decide to tell us, and if it makes me upset. lol. 45:30 - Should have waited to comment, you have the same opinion. lol 53:48 - IMO its because many people only look at the part of the game that interests them; and their opinion of that state of that loop becomes their opinion o fthe game. For example, I watched a video criticising mining routes and piracy, suggesting that a meteor hit a planet or something to cause an event that draws people to an area. "And CIG could then send out missions to both sides." Not thinking that CIG could also do nothing, make it something that shows up from a great distance on scanning, adding some idea of exploration, or reward scanning uncommon areas by the miners. Giving risk/reward choices to explorers too on if they want to sell the info to both sides. No, the speaker was only concerned wth piracy. 1:01:01 - I feel the same way, if we dont hear anythign about the economy in CitCom, I will be disappointed moving into 4.0 and beta. The dupping of 3.23.0 and the results on the player count and behavior highlights how much the "desire to play any loop" has a foundation in the economy. And how fragile the economy currently is. Most people in my discord groups are not playing much, instead hoping for a full wipe.

[@a46xyonix]

Nevermind a players expectations.. because they didn't state the design goals early clearly enough. How about players fall in love with the game based on how the flight combat feels, and pledge hundreds, if not thousands based on that experience... then new dev comes along and completely changes that and it goes from a reasonable sim experience to an Arcady mess that isn't fun anymore. CIG changes flight models more often than some of you change your underwear.

[@popularnhandsome]

they should have figured out what they were buying into before spending that much money.

[@latjolajban81]

@@popularnhandsome The problem comes from CIG changing what they are making.

[@beavschannel5217]

Maybe they shouldn't spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on a game that states EVERYWHERE that it is in development and the systems are subject to change.

[@beavschannel5217]

​@@latjolajban81the goal and theme of the game stays the same, the systems and how it delivers on that goal and theme is subject to change, it's plastered everywhere that it is a work in progress and nothing is set in stone, people should be more careful with their money if they don't like change.

[@latjolajban81]

@@beavschannel5217 If the goal is a space sim then it is not staying the same. That's the problem.

[@Zethez]

This is an MMO. Multicrew ships and the space sim features will eventually cause both expected and unexpected issues. Many backers have pointed out that there are too many captains and not enough crew (if any). Are NPCs really going to be effective? Ship and FPS combat seem to be the most important game loop and others are a second thought. Not sure how this fits into the Space Sim vision as it seems to be primarily a space shooter`.

[@Storm-Cleaver]

Thanks for a good discussion with LiefX.

[@Marlax-101]

no one liked when i suggested suits being able to alert you of incoming debris which would also alert you to sniper fire but with glint what will or should happen is snipers wont use the sniper rifle until they are ready too. there is no reason to use a sniper optic that glints when even real world snipers use closer range optics and can get very close to targets before firing. same reason i never used sniper optics in cod games. unless your shooting 15 miles away there is no point.

[@stevenszmek7007]

I wish they would care more about fixing current issues. Ships like the Mole and Reclaimer have broken elevators, ladders in general are broken. Cargo hauling still is a coinflip chane of loosing all due to game isdues - therefore bog cargo hauling is out of the question. Rocks still bug put when mining, Rockets and torps have their problems, etc... Whatever you do, the chaneces of losing all invested time and capital over a gaming period of 2+ hrs is 50/50. New features, events that break servers dur to more Hammerhads spawning than there are willing gunners, all that stuff might be entertaining for the brad masses and mske good new content for creators and free marketing. But the true quality of the product does not change - just the quantity of things that can and will go wrong.

[@bperras]

The reason why they nerfed snipers was because they want extremely serious consequences for dying. So in order to justify the harsh punishment for dying, they need to increase time-to-kill. If a sniper can kill you with a headshot, snipers will be able to literally just spawn-camp and it would ruin the game. I always find it funny when they implement something to prevent griefing and you get people complaining about how it's unfair because now they can't grief people. Personally, I would rather the game not be as punishing when you die, but that is not the direction they want to take the game.

[@kaisersolo76]

Arena commander is there for the casual

[@Schmeeda-wt9wm]

Make star citizen a tedious grind because of realism and watch it die

[@IrisCorven]

@@Schmeeda-wt9wm I'd rather it die how it was pitched than die 6 months earlier when all the streamers and their audience jump ship for Black Ops 7/Sea of Thieves 2.

[@darmontdk]

the biggest problem for me of master modes is that they arent following set rules. beside that it feels really flustrating to be soo flippin slow... its just.. .why?! whyyy?!

[@khiosa]

This is my first episode listening, based af. Liefx has big brain and his takes on the game are very similar to mine. o7

[@emperorurbi]

We have been wishlisting and hoping for features for 10 years. and sometimes we over react to change or a feature not being what we expected. but as of late CIG is making weird decisions. the glint should indeed be a 'scanning' solution, in combination with a personal shield to shield you while you make a run for cover or something, there are multiple solutions in star citizens tech and lore that are usable, but lately there looking at casual games to loan features from, instead of keeping their own path like they did successfully for years. As for the biggest mistake, MM I haven't seen that much of negative feedback in 10 years i think. the previous flight model, needed some tweaks and rebalances, but was miles ahead of the current excuse for a flight model. As for death of a spaceman, people will work around that, I presume most people will have two accounts/characters. One for pve and rep grind, and one for PVP and dangerous stuff... So chances are it will miss its mark, but if an extra characters cost money its a way to fund the game... There are probably solutions that are easy enough so you don't need two characters But I guess I'm setting expectations and will being disappointed when I create my pvp character like every one else.

[@bhz8499]

“Immerse you through smaller design decisions. Like look at this small sign.” Yes like the one that marks you through walls as a bounty target? Youre talking about the game they were making in 2016….

[@AccidentalFriendlyFire]

Star citizen is a sim... Except for the combat, and certain elements of ship design.

[@AccidentalFriendlyFire]

SO glad for the discussion on glint!

[@AccidentalFriendlyFire]

Loading a ship is FUN? Guessing you've never really done that in real life. :-) I can't call it fun, but it can be satisfying.

[@kennyb5537]

The real problem is is what are the consequences of dumbing the game down ... I personally find fun in difficulty and having to learn new skills ... i get bored of shallow gameplay mechanic. Right now mastermodes could be renamed Booster-mode, no boost and you gotta navmode or die of slowness 200m/s is too fricking slow ... it makes the game shallow and less interesting but also more complex because of all that switching back and forth. It is the cancer of fun. Imagine if all that energy faffing around master mode went into delivering some fun gameplay. 3.22 flight model wasnt bad ...

[@TheNefariousFox]

3.22 was easily tunable to remove the exploits... Now they have even more problems in MM that need to be tuned out. And several of the problems they are proclaiming as features of the model, like boost for speed, and directional limiters for forced 3DOF. I HATE how MM feels to fly in, becasue those limiters are really stupid, and the boost is also really stupid.

[@dawnphantom2439]

Star Citizen isn't a simulation, it is, as CIG puts it, a Persistent Unversre aiming to be an MMO based on a "90's inspired" Sci-Fi Fantasy. So what do we expect from this genre and from the legacy SC follows? That's where you look, not trying to guess what the game is trying to be based on the definition of the word "sim" or "realism".

[@SpaceTomatoToo]

There's a lot to interpret there, I love that we can have conversations about it from different angles.

[@dawnphantom2439]

@@SpaceTomatoToo definitely. I would try bringing up the term 90's Sci-Fi Fantasy in a future episode and seeing how people react to it, see what kind of expectations that invokes compared to expectations of realism. I would love to see the contrast in those things from the community.

[@Qbertqueso]

I would not place the SC universe in the Sci-fi fantasy genre. It's certainly not hard scifi but it's not scifi fantasy

[@dawnphantom2439]

@@Qbertqueso This is the term CIG gave it when they went into detail last Citizencon. It does hold some weight, I mean if we think about what SC universe includes Humanity as usual, but there's also 4 other alien factions with lore ranging from Vanduul warriors with laser spears, Xi'an who are more advanced than humans to the point their technology sometimes comes off as pure magic, Tevarin which are more like nomadic outcasts among society, and there's a whole not of other Sci-Fi stuff mixed in. It's definitely not hard sci-fi, but there are enough things that would definitely place it in sci-fi fantasy.

[@Qbertqueso]

​​​​@@dawnphantom2439I can't speak on CR's quote because I don't think that's a direct quote to be honest, and in the labelling the genre kinda moot. All the things you pointed to are tropes and staples of scifi: Stargate, Mass Effect, Star Trek, Halo etc use all these in different degrees but aren't labeled scifi fantasy. Nearly all scifi can be labeled "fantasy", that's why Hard/Soft sci-fi terms exist. The Martian is Hard Sci-fi, Star Trek is Soft sci-fi. Star Wars and Dune are sci-fi fantasy

[@bloodstoneoperator5372]

It’s not a space sim. It’s a game w sim aspects that allows you to live as a character of your making in a world where space travel is a part of life. Sprinting… how is that unrealistic? Sliding, yep I can do that in real life too. Scope glint is something a real sniper has to worry about because… wait for it, it’s real.

[@Ha1rD1aper]

when you're dealing with a "sim" you can be simulating just about anything. sim games usually simulate real life activities, although, no reason you can't simulate a future where thrusters allow small personal craft capable of space travel with little thrusters on the tops and bottoms of their hull that can lift it. a lot of it is context and application, but, in application, end results can be vastly different. take 2 other dystopian games. on one hand you have Fallout, and on the other you have Metro. they're both dystopian shooters, they both have unique weapons, they both have mutants, etc.. therefore, they are the same yes? no, why not? how about Need For Speed Vs. Forza? both have long running franchises, but one has a reputation and following the other doesn't. big reason i got into this game was because it was supposed to be that game without compromises. was going to be the game that no company would or even could make. basically real life 900 years in the future, where personal ships can fly as easy as a FPV drone. however compromises are being made and a lot of them seem to be marketing based. sad thing is that fear could prevent the single greatest thing to ever happen in the game industry.

[@crusaderenergy7]

CIG will not stop to sell ships, why should they ? (Its such a massive income for them). The sale of concept ships will still be a thing even after the "full" release, and even other ships will still be there to buy for all those that dont want or cant spend the time to grind to get a bigger ship. - But there will most likely be less focus on the ship sale, or wait... who am I kidding here, their marketing department will continue at full speed even after the "full" release. It is a business after all, and they have expenses to cover.

[@Valium_x]

Its meant to be year 3000 too, we cant say its a sim or an arcade. The truth is for SCs survival it has to be fun, it can be high fidelity but i cant see how it can ever be sim.

[@lordfraybin]

LOL..yes. machina, you called it? Insanely time consuming. I once spent 3 hours trying to get a single shot (4 seconds of footage) of my captain sipping a drink of coffee, in the command module of the caterpillar. I didn't know it at the time, but there was a bug that would kill you in the command module if you took your helmet off. Waiting for SQ42. Hoping it will be easier to film in the single player game.

[@suboptimal4539]

Just give people a hard-core mode, once you die, you go back to a reset of your account however it was when you started.

[@Pr0phet-n6z]

This Is Wing commander 2.0 ( always meant to be -best game ever) Wing Commander (video game) - Wikipedia "This is a successor to wing commander series" (Chris Roberts) “I want to bring space games back,” said Roberts, the chief creative officer at Cloud Imperium Games, in an interview with GamesBeat. “The space sims just aren’t happening anymore. This is a spiritual successor to games like Wing Commander and Privateer,” which is another Roberts creation.

[@TheJack4000111]

Was that call to prayer on your audio tomato?

[@ParagonFangXen]

It sure was. You'll hear them in the background alot the more you listen to him XD

[@SpaceTomatoToo]

Yep! We lived next to a mosque, though I just moved today so it'll be a bit quieter lol

[@jeremiahwilkins5837]

I don't mind them earning money on cosmetics, but ship sales need to stop after launch. I know that they still need to make money, but us buying things shouldn't effect the gameplay itself.

[@bperras]

I 100% disagree with what Liefx said about Star Citizen being pay-to-win, or more accurately, his incorrect definition of the term itself. If you can earn the ship in-game by playing the game and earning currency or you can earn the same ship by going to your REAL job, earning an income, and using that money to buy the ship with real currency, that is NOT pay-to-win. That is the ONLY way to balance a game for casual players. If you don't allow casual players who don't have 8 hours a day they can commit to PLAYING A VIDEO GAME, there has to be a way for them to compete with hardcore players who spend all day playing. If you don't, casual players, who are the majority of people who pay money for video games, won't play your game because you're purposely excluding them and making it impossible for them to keep up. If a ship is ONLY available to purchase with real money and cannot be earned in-game and that ship is statistically BETTER than other ships you can get with in-game currency, THAT is pay-to-win. For example, you could make the argument that the Sabre Raven is a pay-to-win ship. Best in its class, cannot be purchased in-game, was only available to purchase in the USA for a limited time and no can only be found on the grey market. The Mustang Omega would have been like that, except they nerfed it to be statistically the same as the Gamma, much to the dismay of Omega owners. The simple fact that we are supposed to be able to earn ships larger than the Javelin, but those ships are only available in-game and will only be attainable via large group efforts, completely obliterates the idea of SC being pay-to-win. It never was, it won't be, and to say it is shows a lot of ignorance.

[@Revixy]

Aww, no more "there he is!" 8:40 XD

[@Gundobald]

100 system… my ass. 12 years in and they hardly have one… four fucking planets, pathetic

[@TheNefariousFox]

Server Meshing... Now get more comprehension or STFU!

[@CMDR_Scorpion]

@Liefx Nailed it with the hitmarker and scope glint comments.. bravo..... brilliant point so well put

[@Qwarzz]

The G-forces when you switch from nav mode to SCM should kill you instantly :)

[@bhz8499]

Wait wait wait 1 more; ArmA implements Halo 2 rules set for infantry, tanks, and aircraft; as long as they stick to the Halo 2 ruleset it’s still a Sim 😂😂😂😂

[@user-zr1tx8ts5y]

Cig needs to remember the audience they are making the game for hardcore space sim fans. The true fans who wanted pvpve. If they make a game that the fans love. the casual tourists will still buy the game because of the hype from the fans. However if they make the game for the casuals/tourists. The true fans will hate it and the game will get review bombed. Its the pattern of gaming. They just need to remember their actual audience wants pvpve

[@stormwolf3255]

TBH they appear to have pretty much given up on the 'realistic' sim aspects of the game... I mean they can't even be bothered with implementing (classical) physics properly so anything else is pretty much going to be a conflicted mess. So much for the old 'physics is not a dirty word' mantra...

[@seanc6754]

I been playing sc for 4 years now and if the GAME was a true sim it would be far to difficult and tedious.. they have to walk the line in the middle.. i remember when i first started i had to watch sooooo many KZbin vids just to figure out how to do anything lol

[@XxTavoRxX]

That's me, I spend about 10 hrs watching videos to 1 hr of play.... I'm still new

[@jgrizz7943]

@Space Tomato Too 28:27 you say you don't understand why people call hit markers & dynamic crosshairs more arcade like. In Real Life you don't have a holographic floating crosshair that allows you to headshot a guy while hip firing your squad automatic weapon. Not sure what part of that you don't get but I would love to hear your reason.

[@JoseJimenez-fc6pu]

SC is more "Classic Scifi Tropes Sim" than Space Sim.

[@namaikikitsune]

"If you see it, other players see it" Except for those invisible asteroids and the other player models that don't load for whatever reason 😅

[@Liefx]

desync is the final boss

[@Kiyomoto657]

Ship sales are a drug that CIG will have a hard time quitting.

[@CynicalMournings]

I will stand on this hill with a knife in my hand. I am absolutely okay with CiG approaching Coca Cola for an endorsement where New New NEW new Coke -centuries of refreshment- is on some big billboards in game and some lore gets written that Coke beat Pepsi in some historical inter corporate conflict. (I've already had GPT write the marketing doc for a laugh) Coca Cola spends about 4 billion a year on advertising. A conservative CPM of in game advertising could net enough to keep the game running...

[@bones3915]

In REAL life the WAREHOUSE loads your CARGO not the TRUCKER!

[@bhz8499]

Last one 🎉 iRacing adopts MarioKart 8 ruleset and sticks to the ruleset maintaining its Sim status 😂😂😂

[@First_Chapter]

Here's a perspective: grinding to get a ship with which to salvage is not fun; the salvaging is fun. Grinding to get a ship with which to mine is not fun; the mining is fun. Grinding for ships is a reason to not play Star Citizen, not an incentive to play the game.

[@EasyIsHere]

It’s paid for convenience not to win, their are plenty of fighter pilots better then people who dump money

[@blackeagle_138]

It is no longer Quanta, it is StarSim

[@David-vx2ie]

Who cares what hardcore so to speak gamers want. Even hardcore gamers don't want to spend 8 hours to get anything accomplished. I think you should have permanent inventory honestly. Everyone says they are hardcore but they don't mind having the option to just reclaim a destroyed ship. How is that simulation?. No what it is, is a bunch of self righteous entitled brats whinning about what they want. Ridiculous

[@nuanil]

Yes, except when it comes to bodily functions

[@benmoi3390]

well they simulate your hunger thirst... you got to wash yourself and poop... but all the physics and the realism... "hey it's supposed to be a game...!!!" they what is the point of having to drink ever 40 minutes to not die instantly... or the same about eating... ignoring the very fact that anyone can pass a day without drinking anything... or spend 24h without eating with no haelth issues... the issues are mostly psychological due to the habit of eating ... your body can live pretty well for days without food... I do it many people are doing intermitent fasting.. but hey let's play a game of space sim where the space ship can only fly below mach1 like WW2 airplane... and where you need to manage you higiene before taking RPG quest to questgivers... .because that'S fun... and then think about it... if you die the realism is you are raised at the hospital... isn't that realistic? but you still got to poop and drink every hours to not die... that'S so great game mechanics... I would like to have fully realistic game... but not a half-way one where they take the more boring thing of both... you know eating drinking... sleeping pooping... all those thing don'T need to be thing I have to do during the hour that I gonna play ... my character has the 23 other hours of the day to do all that... I dream of being able to manage the daily and weekly routine of my character and that he would remain a NPC while I'm offline... following his rooutine of sleep eating and pooping... so then when I would log on I would log in the mids of whatever activities he's doing... or my friends could get him to follow them and help them as a npc... so when I would log I would already be with them,... instead of wasting time to reach them or having to use the stupid idea they have of using some kind of remote clone controle system to play with them across the galaxy... that's so stupid... the amount of choice that are since few years more and more stupid and seams to be idea push by the marketing team to finish the game and get AMAP people to play the game... what is it an ARK game in space? not even... there'S already some like that... it was sold as a space flight simulator... with persistency while you go offline.. and is turning into a MMORPG survival base building game... our ship was supposed to be our home... that's over that idea... we have hangar and gonna have housing instead.... all that because players characters aren't persistent ofline... that's the first thing they should have worked on.... not bed logoff...

[@ChookyChuck]

The Star Citizen fanbase forgets that no MMO's have been successful without casual players.

[@Schmeeda-wt9wm]

This

[@IrisCorven]

Eve Online. 21 years running, still seeing continuous monthly revenue and constant updates. I'd call that successful.

[@Schmeeda-wt9wm]

@@IrisCorven one of the most toxic grindy mmos ever made should not be an idol.

[@IrisCorven]

@@Schmeeda-wt9wm That wasnt your arguement. The toxicity or grindyness of a game factors in none, in that - if anything, that's just proof of how successful it is, when it still has so many players and is still profitable after 21 years with that reputation. Your argument was that none have been successful without casual players. Lineage 2, Dark Age of Camelot, Ultima Online, OG Everquest - All successful without casual players. All turned a sizable profit. One of them was the template on which every other MMO was made, for a long time, until WoW. MMO's can survive without them, and with a niche audience. Plenty of MMO's that have sub-20,000 players are still afloat and keeping their studios alive, supplied with cash, and still pushing out updates. By that metric alone, they're successful.

[@Schmeeda-wt9wm]

@@IrisCorven if you enjoy a degenerated game that has a learning curve so extreme that it's community virtually never grows then go ahead. Ruin SC, lol. Enjoy the niche game CIG will never give you. You're not going to get that niche game like EVE. It simply is not going to happen. EVE was not as financially intense as SC to develop. It's ships have no interior, it's stations have no interior, its planets have no surface to speak of, it's models are not as detailed, it's company that made it is not as large, it doesn't support fps gameplay (except vanguard which looks like something form the early 2010s) it is a smaller game than SC when it comes to the scale of the experience. What makes EVE special is it's robust economy which to its credit is unique. If you want a game with the scope of SC that costs ~100,000,000 per year to continue developing then be ready for it to accommodate casuals. Otherwise CIG would literally go under unless your tiny tiny tiny niche community each are willing to individually spend thousands or tens of thousands of dollars each per year in perpetuity to make up for the lost revenue CIG would need. Good luck with that. When you're ready to return to reality I'll be here.

[@jasonrobinson7922]

Maybe nasa and others are looking into this. Hmmm, i wonder

[@alexanderdooley5833]

I veiw it as paying to skip game play. Being broke and earning ships is the whole game, skipping that you got nothing to work for.

[@IrisCorven]

Except thats the game now, without content, base building, territory, consequences, Org features, etc. Ultimately, the game isn't supposed to be a constant 20k mission grind for the next ship. It's always been described more like a SWG "community-based emergent gameplay" than a WoW style "curated themepark where you grind for the next armor set".

[@Eggsecuter]

@@IrisCorvenI hope it does turn into that game where the mechanics and systems facilitate player engagement and community creativity

[@First_Chapter]

With respect: my perspective is opposite. Grinding for a ship with which to salvage is not fun; salvaging is fun. Grinding for a ship with which to mine is not fun; actually mining is fun. If the question is one of what am I working for when salvaging or mining the answer is: nothing, except for the experience of salvaging or mining or simply flying a simulated spacecraft.

[@wraith511802003]

Buying ships is how the dev is paid for. No one should complain about it. They have said after release no more buy ships in store. Poop an pee mechanics are juvenile stupid game play. They ruled that out already. Shower, maybe, as you get dirty your interactions with people are more negative.

[@Starbuck.Laniakea]

What's that awful wailing in the background?