Something Is Changing in Star Citizen

Comments · 209

• CA

  @CaptainKatarn · 1 day ago · pinned

  We’re only a few subscribers away from 25k and I want to thank each of you for being here and interacting with the channel. Without you watching I’d just be a guy talking to himself about Star Citizen. I mean I’d probably still be doing that anyway, but it’s nice to have company lol. I put a lot into these videos and seeing you come back, share your own experiences and sometimes tell me why you think I’m completely wrong makes it worth doing. I want this to be a place where we can be excited about the game and still have those conversations. Thank you for being part of the crew. And my channel members specifically as their extra support helps me cover the costs of the adobe creative suite I use to edit videos and thumbnails on the channel. I&apos;m grateful.<br><br>Do you feel like things are starting to turn a corner? What’s the one problem CIG could fix that would make the biggest difference to your time in the game?

  17

• SB

  @Sbubbymac · 1 day ago

  I&apos;m with you 100% on revisiting old design promises and reframing them in an achievable way to make a functional and fun game. <br><br>Big example I always get smoke for when I talk about it is instancing. I say instance the heck out of it. One of The problems sandbox mmo&apos;s have is that they&apos;re a mile wide and an inch deep. That has to stay true because players can and will interfere with and disrupt long form narrative content when and wherever possible if they can. The new SoO, ASD, TSG, Rock Cracker, these are all examples of incredibly deep wells of custom hand crafted game experiences that only succeed in closed off scenarios. I think CIG has recognized that in order to give this game depth, they have had to change their stance on &quot;everyone can interact with you at any time any where&quot;, and it&apos;s done wonders for actually making it feel more like a game rather than an interactive tech demo. I hope that continues in other areas of design and development. If that means we only have specific planets that we can put bases on, so bad apple orgs don&apos;t territorially lock out entire reaources from the general playerbase in certain systems, so be it. <br><br>Keep having great takes!

  3

• PI

  @pilksuk · 1 day ago

  They should at least try this with ground vehicles

  11

• CA

  @Cantatio411 · 12 hours ago

  Make weapon racks mean something! I want my ship to be a battleground.

  1

• PE

  @perin99 · 1 day ago (edited)

  The physics tech preview was great. I usually give detailed feedback but this time it was two words, &quot;thank you.&quot; Fingers crossed it&apos;s included in the next live patch.

  1

• TH

  @thedatatreader · 1 day ago

  I&apos;ve been following this project since their first live playtest <b>where the ship they were loading clipped into the ground and exploded</b> , and it&apos;s been refreshing to see how discussions went from theorizing what Star Citizen could be to how people liked or disliked what it was becoming. <br><br>Up until I&apos;d say, 4.0, Star Citizen was basically a really high-fidelity average MMO (when it worked), with its only really differentiating factor being that you could actually travel from a planet-to ship-to planet. <br><br>These past few years have changed all of that though with all of Chris&apos; high minded ideas gradually being implemented, and we can actually debate whether DOASM is actually something we&apos;d want. <br>It&apos;s cool to see Star Citizen (and Squadron 42 surprisingly) finally get an identity for better or worse, and I don&apos;t think that you said is hyperbole; this really is the road to 1.0. <br>If the team running the show can fix these longstanding annoyances and deliver polish the gameplay desperately needs, I think this game will be more than capable of standing on its own against &quot;real&quot; MMOs on the market.

  2

• SE

  @Seithim · 1 day ago (edited)

  I cannot tell exactly what they&apos;ve done, but it likely has to do with how these physical entities are interpolated over the network. &nbsp;It will be cool to see how much more it improves and when it also comes in for the rest of the rigidbody types.<br><br>I also want to further sing the praises of Silvan. &nbsp;He&apos;s very dedicated.

  1

• SI

  @sirnukealot84 · 1 day ago

  Man I dont mind cig lowering the HP a small bit to make pve a little faster. It will help new players and backers who only have a small starter to ship to progress forward without them having to quit their job for star citizen. And might make multicrew ship play more fun when doing pve too. So imo its a win-win. Only downside might be it could increase inflation but i think we should give it a try for a patch cycle or 2 and give cig some numbers.

  1

• BR

  @BrokenBoxProduction · 1 day ago (edited)

  Pvp vs pve should be the same specs wise. The difference with pve is much easier to adjust ai skill giving players a sense of what it takes to down a ship damage wise. then when you fight a player, youre fighting a different skill level and fighting style rather than also adding an arbitrarily stonger ship to learn and overcome.

  2

• JO

  @JonnyTheKidd. · 1 day ago

  though i am excited about the physic change. when playing it, it just felt like it used to before contanors started flying all over. not to long ago you could decorate your hanger, but just couldn&apos;t really put anything on anything without it jiggling off. the TP felt the same

  1

• BR

  @Brigadier_Beau · 1 day ago

  I am not big on PvP but I would prefer my PvE to have the same stats as any other ship. &nbsp;I know I will never win against a dedicated PvP player. But I at least want to have a feel for what real damage needs to be done if I do get into a PvP fight.

  2

• TH

  @thechroniclesofcriss942 · 1 day ago

  are they... CIG are... are CIG actually... no. they couldn&apos;t be... right? can they really be ... LISTENING??? CHANGING???

  4