Guard Frequency Episode 117 | Flaming Balls of De-bries

Comments

10 responses to “Guard Frequency Episode 117 | Flaming Balls of De-bries”

1. 

   Alberto Martinez

   April 27, 2016

   Are you guys crazy? Seriously you expect CIG to deliver “stretch goals” in a Alpha product?? Alpha..get real guys. CIG has several times stated that the game will release with persistence, multi-crew, several professions, SQ 42, at least 40 systems, and the economy..everything else that not that is extra or fluff. MVP doesn’t mean lets not give them a bunch of things we promised it means this is the min we will release something and have the balls to call it Retail. Every company has to do this period it’s not a new idea. Anything outside this is DLC or an Expac..jeezus talk about turning a mountain into a molehill..

   Reply
   1. 

      Troopa

      April 29, 2016

      Oh look, the standard CIG cultist come by to spit on people making completely valid criticisms of the game. It’s so predictable. I’m curious if you’re actually paid by CIG to “attack” people for raising valid concerns, or if you do this kind of garbage on your free time…

      Reply
2. 

   Adon

   April 27, 2016

   Good show everyone!

   To me the minimally viable game for Star Citizen is

   100 Systems (not all having landing zones, the lore guides on some of the systems mention having no landing zones in some of them).
   Fully finished economy system
   Fully finished flight model
   Reputation System
   Mining System
   Bounty Hunting
   Cargo System
   Merchant System
   Organization support
   and finally A good portion of ships for each role

   I’m likely missing something, but off the top of my head that’s what I feel is required for the ‘star citizen experience’.

   As to why they’ve not released their sheet of “Minimum Viable Product” checklist is that they want to be able to edit it as needed without a huge backlash. The community as a whole is not known for being level headed with their reactions and there are also people out there who will use any excuse to make a stab at CIG. Imagine way back when they changed the damage tech over to what they are using now. If they had a MVP list that specifically listed that tech on it, then they decided to go to the new damage tech we have now, as it was the better choice overall for the game. I’d bet my ass someone would try to use that against them and say that they change what is required for the game whenever they like and now something that they said was the “minimum” is now not in the game. Keeping it behind the scenes allows for them to do what they feel is best without having to justify every single change to a bunch of over reacting people on the internet. At least I hope that’s what it is :).

   Reply
   1. 

      Troopa

      April 29, 2016

      The MVP is the list of stretch goals that CIG promised to use our pledges for. The same list they said they could complete with 65M. Period. End of discussion.

      Reply
3. 

   MrEightEx

   April 27, 2016

   Hey guys, great show once again! I loved the Tony Vs Angry Tony (Why not Mirror Universe Tony?) I didn’t see that coming and it got me to LOL. As far as MVP I think somewhere in-between would be fine, but I haven’t thrown nearly as much cash at this game as others. I don’t know if I’m a fan of always being able to pay real world currency on these ships though and I agree that it may be time to switch gears from the kickstarter mindset. Keep up the good work, your one of the best parts of my long commute!

   Reply
4. 

   Cincinnatus

   April 27, 2016

   Could you share your list of stretch goals and status?
   Also, CIG was providing stretch goes based on reaching a funding goal. The funding was only for pre-launch work especially when the game has double its development budget. Therefore, they should not double charge backers for a DLC or expansion. Let the whales dump money in for ships that they will not use to fund the game.

   Reply
5. 

   Amontillado

   April 27, 2016

   Uggg…

   Couple of things here.

   As you rightly quote, the statement CR made was “…. And, we’ll have what we determine is a minimum viable product feature list for what you would call Star Citizen the commercial release….”

   So we’re talking about a feature list, and CR goes on to handily provide us with a (non-exhaustive) list of features.

   “you can load it up, it plays really well, it’s really stable, there’s lots of content, there’s lots of fun things to do, different professions, lots of places to go, we’ve got a really good ecosystem.’ So, when we get to that point that’s when we would say, “Now it’s not alpha, it’s not beta, it’s Star Citizen 1.0.”

   Not terribly detailed, but the message I think is clear. Star Citizen will be deemed commercially releasable when there is lots of content and it’s stable.

   He also says that they’ll continue adding to the game after it’s released commercially ” – Which by the way includes some of the later stretch goals we have because not all of that is going to be for ‘absolutely right here’ on the commercial release.”

   So we KNOW that CIG is not planning on fulfilling all of the stretch goals on launch. Moreover.. CIG NEVER promised that all of the stretch goals would be ready at commercial release. Some are promised to be there. Those need to be fulfilled.

   I’m unclear on what you’re angry about. That Star Citizen’s stretch goals aren’t further along at this (alpha) point in time? The pace of development isn’t sufficient for you? You mention the amount of money CIG has raised. What does this have to do with the discussion? Surely you understand that it takes both money AND time to get this stuff done. They could have five times the money needed and not have had the time to get it done yet.

   I can understand a disatisfaction in the pace of developement, I want it sooner rather than later myself, but care should be taken to not allow impatience to cause us to rabble rouse or over-react to some poor choice of words.

   CR used the language “We’ll have what we determine…”. I think Lennon hit the interpretation on this one. This doesn’t mean they don’t have a clue on what they’re driving towards for the commercial release. It means that there is a long way between now and things can still change. They know what they are working on, they have a plan on the order of things. Producers are out there organizing the work. What the final launch feature list is going to be has yet to be determined. Good!

   Reply
6. 

   L-Wook

   April 27, 2016

   24 stretch goals down is more than a couple. No I don’t think it possible to deliver all as MVP, especially since I don’t want them to have to push that announcement back 4yrs! I’m hoping sometime next year SC can launch with persistence (obv), practical implementation of 5-6 careers, capital multi crew ships, jump points (with a resonable number of systems), planetary landing, shopping / ship upgrades and proper 9:1 npc’s. I think that should be a tough enough target for 2017, the rest can come along in updates (hey look a new jump point was discovered…).
   Hey, great show and please never stop being an ignorant slut, Tony.

   Reply
7. 

   seannewboy

   April 27, 2016

   Wonderful show everyone.

   As for minimums, everything promised has to be available, and there should be a good, achievable timeline for the rest of the stretch goals.

   Reply
8. 

   Rentaspoon

   April 29, 2016

   They say that the minimum viable product for commercial release still has to be determined so I don’t understand why people are getting upset, to any backer that doesn’t really matter as they are already have a product they can play with. If anything it getting it released sooner means the last time the verse gets reset comes sooner.

   I’d be happy with the MVP just being better performance and a 90% of gameplay mechanics, I don’t think they have a choice about the ships they have to be in.

   MVP doesn’t mean early and incomplete either way I don’t think it’ll affect me.

   Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.