Considering that squadron 42 is still the focus and that this is probably a year away and after that we need integration of the technical debt to have working dynamic server meshing which is likely another year away after squadron releases, I think it might take some time. At that point we most likely need to overhaul(read create) the gamplay, gold pass on the ship fleet and update to make it work with whatever new systems we had to add and then start creating all the solar systems. My best guess would be at least 5 years away.
Really good thoughts, Mike. For example, I've not heard anyone else talk about the issues regarding PvP organisations and what their overarching goals might/should be. It's an important observation.
What I think a realistic timeline is for the game, is 4.0 Either end of summer or end of year. SQ42 Beta End of year with Citcon (alongside 4.0 if it doesnt come out in summer). SQ42 full release Q1-Q2 2025. Then i think once SQ42 is fully released CIG will focus for 3 years minimum building out game mechanics. If we can get DynamicSM working by the end of 2027 then it could be possible for a 1.0 to come out at the very end of 2027, very possibly early 2028. If not DynSM then honestly whenever they change that after 2028 is when a 1.0 will come. (this is assuming they are able to ramp up production of content in those 3 years past SQ42)
game wont release before dynamic server meshing is working 100%, we should see static server meshing with pyro end of year but full performance enhancements and refinery with the game code will take years, i would expect 2-3 years after sq42 releases.
Mike I think that as far as crafting goes, I think the distribution centers will be the main source of blueprints. I think you will go to the specific company’s DC do missions for them and build up rep and start getting rewarded with blueprints. On the other side, you will raid them/ infiltrate them to steal blueprints.
I am not holding my breath that they even deliver a proper ArcCorp within 2 years... We were told that the surface of ArcCorp was going to be accessible to players. Right now- the buildings and ships are superficial and like 1/3 scale (relative to the player). I understand that promises are going to be broken- but LZs cannot be the only places accessible to the player. That entire planet should be available to land/walk/shop/whatever. That alone is going to take 2 years.
The minimum prerequisite for the game to even be close to 1.0 is server stability and AI performing as intended, which isn't going to happen for a long time; add all the ships, planets, systems and features you want, but until the game runs smoothly and performs as intended, there's no chance in hell it's going to be met with anything but criticism and laughter.
Precisely. If it isnt clean and functional no ones going to want to touch this with a 10 foot stick. Hard enough getting people through bugs just to sit for another 15 minutes while we travel to do something else next thing theyre asleep lmao
you say that forgetting ppl still threw money at DCS way before it got any core updates and multithreading support to improve performance (it was bad a few years ago) 1.0 is just gunna be there glorified release so they can then say "oh hey live service now, keep supporting us please"
This game needs so much optimization and polishing work. Like atleast 1 full year of polishing on things that are currently existing in the game. If they wanted to drop it with just the features in the game now. And they want to add another 3 or 4 years worth of features. So add another 6 month to a year for polish on that too. I’m thinking 1.0 by 2030. That is if they want to release a nice, finished, polished game. Of course they could drop 1.0 with still all the bugs and unpolished features much like Ark survival evolved did. But I really want the game to feel like a game. And not have to fill the gaps with my imagination. (Also I won’t be happy until I can play as a banu. First full release 2.0 expansion?)
thing is they are at least 1-2 years in the polishing phase for SQ42 now considering they are porting a lot of stuff from SQ42 over to SC, while the code is the same, its implementation isnt so SQ42 needs to finish its polish really before SC 1.0 can even start its polish phase so its arguably 3-5 years out imo, ships still need to be finished, star systems still need to be finished (christ we still havent got pyro yet to live)
they could polish all they want without server meshing working our fps will never go up some for performance, the game is just to heavy to run as it is now.
My core belief is the thing holding back everything is server meshing. Until they master that and get it working in game, we will never see meaningful game play added. Everything will continue to be these bare bones tier 0 implementations of the game loops. Why? Because the servers are barely hanging on as it is. They can't handle any more complex gameplay than this. Server performance is why all the NPCs do nothing. Hard to add fun complex missions without NPCs involved. Server performance is why they don't bother to add animals or fish or birds. They'd just stand around like NPCs do. Server performance is why mining is the most evolved game loop, all you need is a ship and some rocks to make it work. Server performance is why we can't have proper quest givers with audio dialogue. Everything is text in our mobiglass. Server meshing should fix all this..... and if it does my hope is the gameplay floodgates will FINALLY open, and we will see the devs starting to be able to implement all the things they've been talking about. We'll see game loops finally move to tier 1 and beyond. Cities will begin to feel alive. We'll be able to follow NPCs around and watch them do their jobs, see lots of ships in the verse flying around. It will start to feel like a living, breathing MMO that feels like things have changed every time you log in. THEN we can start talking about 1.0 dates. Then we will be close to a full game in my opinion.
Kingship invasions would 100% change the dynamic when it comes to solo play. If a capital ship capable of deploying 100s of fighters infested a system making "normal" gameplay loops impossible people wanting to play solo would be trumped and everyone would be forced to work together. Xenothreat is some cacameme bullshit, xenothreat needs to be what its named. That alone would make this game 100x more dope. Economy or not.
Beta 2028 release in 2030, been sayin it since 2020. People called me crazy, stupid, salty, etc. Happy to be proven wrong, but 2025 is legit insane or disingenuous.
I've been shat on so much for saying in 2018 there was NO CHANCE of Pyro to come in 2020... Once CIG gives crumbs of progress, a whooole lot of the player base go apeshit crazy and start howling that the content floodgates are open and release is just around the corner.
Its insane to bring up timelines for 1.0 when Chris only brought it up to say they're FINALLY going to start putting something solid on paper as to what ships in 1.0
Never trust any videos that present Star Citizen with a positive attitude related to timing, CIG never delivered anything on time. My estimation is that SQ42 will be released in 2-4 years, the end of 2026 would be my "optimistic" expectation, and early 2028 for my "pessimist" expectation. Now for the PU fully 1.0 release? Sheesh, I wouldn`t expect to be ready this decade. Keep in mind that I`m a realistic person, I`m not at all a "dreamer", and I filter all the BS from CIG marketing, for perspective, SC is lacking so many features that have been shown to us already. -Sandworm. -Server Meshing. -Pyro. -New UI. -Galaxy Map. -NPCs. -Base building. -Apartment ownership. -Hangar ownership. -Ship internal customization. -Raids. -Aliens. -Crafting. -Bounty Hunting 2.0. -Exploration gameplay loop. -Science gameplay loop. -Engineering gameplay loop. -Expedition gameplay loop. And many more....
I actually agree with Mike, i mean look at what we HAVE in-game within the last 6 months. Here are my thoughts: At the current pacing i would expect Pyro to release before the end of 2025. If we get it before 2024 is over i would be ecstatic! But i try to keep it real here :) After Pyro is released, we will probably get (god bless) Modular ships! Base Building. After base building is polished up a little bit, we will probably get the Progression we are begging for. Once we get those and of course a whole bunch of Amazing ship sales in between, so the marketing team can chill out a little with the "Exclusive" Ships. After all of that we just might get some info within 1-2 years about future Star Systems. SQ42 i expect in late 2025 - 2026 to release. CIG probably wants to get SC in a "1.0 Stable Beta" Version around the time SQ42 is released. So they can use the marketing slogan "An alpha of 10+ years of development finally enters its BETA!" and make everyone excited around that. More ship sales in between.... Then i finally see after 3-5 years THIS game finally coming together, if it keeps the current pacing! :) Only after SQ42 is fully out there, do i expect SC to finally get some love. However, that is all in good hopes. I just need to put a hard hold on my spending, being a concierge is enough for me, i`m done. Until i see tangible progression, reputation system, new mission types & NEW game play loops & much more.
before all of that they have to get server meshing working, that is what is holding most things back right now, the servers can barely handles what we have now.
Boredgamer is one of the worst clickbaiters unfortunately.... he reduced his credibility to 0 already long ago 1.0 is a 203X thing - at least if we assume that we have stable gameplay and no further wipes. You gotta face reality
Bored has been saying 1.0 for the past 5 years. Him and ole Space Tomato are some die hard sycophants when it comes to Star Citizen. I will type this out again. If you look at what was promised and what we have currently in the game, there is absolutely NO way we get to a 1.0 Live version within the next 8-10 years. CIG would have to start axing promised features left and right to make that happen. Just the scaled back number of systems in game from 100 to just 12 or so will take them YEARS to complete alone. Now, toss in all the ship back log. Jon Crew said it will take them 12-18 months to complete just ONE capital ship and how many do we have left to see the light of day? Alien races, Earth landing zone, player housing, player bases with base building, atmospheric flight models, ship components, AI server blades, Quantum economy, NPC crews, passenger flights, VIP flights, in-game racing teams and leagues, crafting, ship modularity, ground vehicles, ROADS, settlements, outposts, in game news reporting. I'm sure I'm missing features too. ALL of that in 2 years? In what time space continuum would that ever happen?! Guys... just stop with the 1.0 stuff. Not happening anytime soon... if ever fully realized. But sure enough, folks will sit through another year of Citcon hype and start squealing 1.0 next year or the year after that. And here I thought fentanyl was America's scourge when in reality, it's Star Citizen copium!
I can’t take anything bored gamer says seriously. Man speculates too much the fact that this is even a thing just pushes me further from Mikes content.
Great show Mike, pretty much agree with you. For me 1.0 is 5-6 star systems, npc crew, economy. Unfortunately 1.0 is at least 2 years out. Keep it up bro, peace
i have a hard time believing SC is going to be here in fewer than 5 years. they still have to release SQ42 and then deal with a bunch of inevitable bugs and tweaks. there is still a lot of server tech that needs to be tested and implemented to give SC the full scale that it needs. base building is going to take a while, star engine is continuing optimization, improving flora and fauna to make the planets feel alive, developing all the gameplay loops. there is so much stuff.
IMO there is no point in even speculating about a 1.0 release until two things happen. First thing is Sq42 released. Not close, not having a hard release date. Until we have Sq42 in our hands and it is good there is no point talking about a 1.0 PU release until that happens it's pipe dream. Second thing that we need is stable dynamic server meshing. Those are the two key points that until we have them there is zero possibility of a 1.0 release happening. Even after we have those two things a 1.0 release is likely still multiple years away but it's not even a discussion worth having until then.
Boredgamer is in a fantasy land, he said ALIENS!??? HAHAHA They can't even get the basics right!!! CIG didn't think this far ahead as Mike did. They just pasted crap together and are figuring it out as they go along. This will be EVE, just in first person view. A game like this should not have an end game. You just keep adding things to it. There's sooo much that needs to be done, it's laughable. CIG FLEXED THERE MUSCLES BEFORE THEY STRETCHED FIRST. Now there hurting bad.
I don't watched BG anymore. He's just a hyping fan boy that always pumps everything up like it's the greatest thing ever, knowing that it likely won't be. It's a bit disingenuous. Plus he regurgitates information constantly by making more videos about the same "news".
There is absolutely no way that they release the promised game in two years. This demo that we have is nowhere near a finished game. There has to be at least 100 systems, server stuff sorted out, actual missions, etc. How many years did it take them to "finish" S42? SC is SO much bigger. I am not holding my breath that we see a 1.0 until at LEAST 7 years from now. Not a chance.
We're going to look back on this in 4 to 6 years and laugh at how foolish any of us were to think the game would be released in 2 years or less from now.
Minimum 5 years before 1.0. I don't believe is that close, as the statement from the CEO sounds like "we have now finished the tech stuff" and they are now starting to create the gameplay loop.
what is suppose to be progression in star citizen…. there is no character progression… everyone already bought and paid for the ships they want… what are we doing here guys. Is there going to be unlock evemts or what? What is the reason to play….
@@Biter1975 Reputation could be a key progression item. However, I think they really need to expand more progression gameplay. I think they could continue to lean in on missions. Xeno threat, or even the bounty threat level unlocks are simple examples of progressive missions.
What they said many years ago is that ships are just the starting point. The real progression is supposed to be components. The ships they currently offer are supposed to be equipped with only Tier 1-2 components with Tier 3 being a rare exception. Tiers are supposed to go up to Tier 10 which are locked behind reputation, game knowledge and skill. But this plan was years ago, so who knows. Components are not insured and will be lost on ship destruction. Collecting rare loot and trinkets from around the verse is supposed to be another thing. Beyond that is the plan that each career is so fleshed out and engaging coupled with the dynamic AI system that you just keep playing because its fun.
I dont even think SQ42 will be released for another 4 years and I had the mind set that SQ42 release would happen before 1.0 . The reason being why I think SQ42 wont release for another 4 years is that CIG maybe have already cannibalized a significant portion of their protentional sales of the game already. they probably know it too which is why they are started talking about releasing on SQ42 on console. That way they can actually have good sale numbers on release. even if the game is perfect 10/10, if half of all start citizen players bought it already, that doesnt leave much left over for sales on release day. The best selling game of 2023 was Hogwarts legacy. a Good game from a massive IP meant to appeal to as much people as possible that released on all platforms and it took 1 year to sell 22 million copies. SQ42 would be a niche game released on PC only with a large player base who already bought it. The console market hasnt been touched yet. though they wouldn't release on this generation of consoles, they would wait for the next one which would be released in 2027-2028. I think 1.0 would be released after SQ42 or at the same time. I don't see 1.0 happening soon then SQ42 after
The way I see it is: whenever we talk about 1.0, that’s Beta 1.0, not release. We might have enough gameplay systems and game loops in a few years, but not content or missions, locations, ships, etc.
You know, the more I watch your content and see how things are. I'm starting to understand why your name is saltymike. I'm starting to agree with everything more and more. I believe it when I see it. Keep up the saltiness!
11:07 holy sh*t someone finally said it. Having to make titles like this is quite literally what many youtubers are forced to do to get engagement. Also, yes. 18 months for 1.0 is a super tall order. Is that the bottles of copium talking?
Alright. BEFORE watching this at all. A little theory crafting! -----Near the bottom I have the post video comment.---- IMO: (Hopeful but I think not too hopeful with the recent Server Meshing progress) 0% we get 1.0 this year. 50% we get 1.0 Citcon 2025 (1.5 yrs) 95% we get 1.0 Citcon 2026 with SQ42 release. (2.5yrs) Biggeest reason for this is the old claim of 5 systems being the "minimum for release". So we kinda have to have SQ42 for Odin to drop. That would give us Stanton, Pyro, Nyx, Odin. Only one more system to call it "5 systems minimum for release". In terms of the 5th system it obviously would have to be attached to 1 of those 4. So options are: -Magnus, -Terra, -Hadrian, -Castra, -Cano, -Oso, -Tohil, -Bremen, -Tanga, -Kellog, -Virgil. Of 11 options, 7 are UEE controlled, 2 are "Developing", 1 is Unclaimed, 1 is Vanduul. Now, the hinge point. While SQ42 takes place primarily in Odin, it BEGINS during the Battle of Vega II. So I'd imagine there is a decent amount of the Vega system developed that is well hidden due to SQ42. And only 1 system connect to Vega from the original 4 mentioned above.... Bremen. Stats on Bremem. -6.14au (could change with change to Pyro size so potentially about the same as Stanton) -4 planets (Bremen I -protoplanet with no resources) (Bremen II -home to Consolidated Outland and "sparsely populated") (Bremen III -heavily mined coreless planet) (Bremen IV -Massive ice giant too risky to harvest) So I'd guess 2 easy to throw together planets, 1 with some detail, and 1 heavy detail planet. -4 Jump Points (well spread out but keeps it quite close to the SQ42 systems and original systems) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Okay after watching this.... wow. I think this really highlights the CIG DESPERATELY needs to define 1.0. They say 1.0 "release". Does that mean release like "we've released but we'll keep updating?" Or does that mean 1.0 release into BETA? I just assumed 1.0 was release into BETA. But it's very clear that doesn't seem to be the common mindset. Those are two very different statements. Mainly due to the fact that an actual "release" is a bit impossible within 3-4 years when we're technically still EARLY ALPHA. If 1.0 is a BETA release and what CIG would compare to an "early access release" that so many games do on steam they wouldn't be in the wrong. IF they explain it's still BETA state. Personally, I see BETA being 1.0 when I really think about how much is still needed to even start in terms of gameplay loops (zero science, zero exploration, zero farming, etc). And I'd still partly bet that we get a decent run of systems in that Beta "release". That's where I start to think Pyro in 6months , Nyx 1yr , Odin 1.5 -2yrs, SQ42 and Beta 2-3yrs out.
if Asmon plays Sq42 with the current style of UI, imagine the cooking CIG will get from him and his massive followers, i have little hope for CIG to realise how bad their UI is looking even after the update
@@Cmdr_V yh it will have a following, just not a big one. thats sad reality of FOMO and money sink with ship costs. but I do think SC would need a near perfect launch to be good (sad but true) it set that bar itself being the highest funded game in history and still growing atm
@@frogger2011ifythe method of monetization and extent of it has ensured they will have a long term playerbase (though it may not be enough to keep it running without private servers). Many will be unwilling to accept that our large buyins were a mistake and that the external nay sayers were right (if it flops) and stick with and defend it no mattrr what.
SC 1.0 is a long way off yet. There is enough to do with 3.23, progressing to 4.0 and Pyro while maintaining the gains built up from 3.23 onwards, when you have three, maybe 4, or 5 Systems in game, with everything running well, INCLUDING the content for each system THEN the possible release of a Star Citizen 1.0 becomes a more realistic possibility. Of course, the OTHER issue with regard to Star Citizen: Longevity, servers cost money, maintaining the game costs money, iteration of features, making existing missions better, improving ship functionality and creating new content costs money, and lastly CIG needs to pay it's employees, all costs money. So the funding model becomes the thing. Ship sales alone, whatever the bundle size, and the current subscriptions will not fill that bowl sufficiently. I almost forgot the OTHER important thing.....Progression, rewards for time spent playing, skill sets achieved, reputation earned, wealth generated, etc. etc. All the above matter to a STAR CITIZEN 1.0
To me, Minimum 5 to full release, but ad infinitum and as many needed to solve the unforeseen hurdles that will appear along the way. But minimum 5 years. Then you go on and say "If you've been following SC for a VERY LONG TIME you'll remember conversations about never having crafting in SC". And I was like Lol, that isn't so old, I've been saying that like a year ago... And fuck me it's been already 6 years, and by that time I was following since already some years... How fast does a decade go by...
"Non youtube people" are 99.993% of the planet. If you accept Capitalist realism as an excuse for RUclipsr's lying to us, why not just accept this as true of everything? "Non CIG people are so funny. This is how game development is. If you don't tap the saps, and string them along through 'early access' and FOMO, you're never going to compete."
Oooooh you asked if this (insert game mechanic) makes this game fun. That's a major foul according to the SC community. In all honesty, that has been my take on this for years now. Started when they made the quantum drive more "shiny", hit harder when they made water physics for SHOT GLASSES! I absolutely HATE the need to play twister with my pour hands just to open a door or interact with a corpse: thankfully they have sorta fixed this recently, but they are still going out of they're way to make this SUPER real life rather than super fun. I don't need a day job in a space game. Eve Online exist for that.
If 1.0 is going to be the minimum viable product as described by CR at CitCon (5 star systems, a working economy, sufficient stability that your group can play for 2 hours without losing a character to bugs, base building), I don't expect it to be delivered for at least 6 years. 8 years is a more realistic figure. For all of the things BoredGamer is expecting, I think it will take at least 10 years. If they slap the 1.0 label on it at any point within the next 4 years, the game will be ridiculed and crash and burn. So I suppose if Star Citizen 1.0 releases before 2034, BoredGamer's clickbait title is correct, at least in my case. I just won't have any interest in playing it.
1.0 is a fully functional Terra. High capacity, High Security, tons of NPCs. It also has to work. 2030 for real. Default location for all the noobs too. They can also try and do 4.0 by end of the year. Then every year do a 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, …, run up to 1.0.0 in 2030 Sure the changes might not be as big as 3.0 and 4.0, but it would still be a good runway to build hype for 1.0.0.
1.0 will release (in whatever state) at the same time or just before Squadron 42 because CIG wouldn’t want to miss the opportunity to convert new players to their live service game, Star Citizen. For me, this just seems obvious! So is 1.0 moving to a subscription model e.g. 30$ per month subscription (or buy a 360$ ship and get 12 months free subscription).
I'd say 1.0 is 2 years at a *minimum*. Realistically? 2028. There is way too much to do, still. 3.23 does look like the "set-up" patch to get us to 4.0 and its branch. Then, we'll be in that 4.0 branch for another 3 years until beta. At the very least, I see SQ42 for holiday 2025.
37:05 You mention something that people could experience with a FPS POV and its own taste. SC is the potential Eve Online successor with its own taste. Its different because SC you are not a "race", so you don't start with buffs attributed to your own ship race. But the Player Economy and the Org End Game is 100% important to make the game a success instead of just a great looking meh. BUT you need to have more than 100 systems for this. Owning land/region and systems, 100 system is a major bottle neck.
If we are lucky.....or actually Our children or grand children are, it will be in this eon 1.0 will be released. Just joking...personally I have given up focusing to much of the future, and more focusing on what we get out of each patch release, cause all Hype started great with the 3.23 patch coming up, but total buggy. I prefer stability, instead of lotsa features that do not work as they should. 1.0 should arrive when all the basics and the actual game play for the different features are working and give us game play. That is just my point of view. ThanX for this react vid Mike! Cheers!
So much fuzzy terminology - Is 'minimum viable product' what will work in the market for fulfill promises to backers? Different people are on a different place on that spectrum. There are multiple complications beyond that, such as constantly changing promises, mutually exclusive promises, different scopes at different times. 'Minimum viable product' for a project with no public announcements is very complicated as is; adding all the Star Citizen specific complications into the mix makes reasonable discussion or consensus basically impossible. So to provide the answer, what is the question?
Whenever 1.0 is released, it needs the obvious features and functions for the various ships to be utilized and environments to be enjoyed, but it also needs to have the small additions demonstrated over the years, ie: Ship Naming, AI blades, etc... I feel there should be 6, known star systems and 7, to be found by players with long duration/range exploration fleets, either by finding the system or a jumppoint to the new system, found about every year and a half to nearly three years (15.5 to 20.3) and maybe a few others? ;-) I've considered data running ships like spy ships, gathering data, reconnaissance, etc... and getting it to those who paid for it or just need it?
less than 2 years for 1.0 is hyper unrealistic IF we assume they aim to get everything done by then. atm economy is still a god damn mess, no quanta in site. will dont even have the (i think 5) star systems they are aiming for upon release then up to 100 in the future (could be wrong here but I do remember them giving a figure for a 1.0 release a few years back) Either way, gameplay loop atm is just non existent. the starting gameplay loop is literally nothing and just forces ppl away or into dropping big money for ships (that needs to get sorted) like give us starter mining ships that dont cost like £130+ otherwise you are forced to do basic cargo missions/bounties but with ship costs going up in a game with no proper economy or gameplay loops etc. the game just doesnt have enough substence imo to be 1.0 ready. I just dont see it happening. IF 1.0 releases in 2 years then mark my words CIG will hide under the cover of "live service now keep supporting us" this sustainability with ship sales is going to plummit and its going to happen when 1.0 releases or SQ42 does because ppl will get a good idea of what to expect if either one is finished before the other and SQ42s trailer imo showed nothing beyond what SC PU already has to offer. I've got a about £450 in SC and SQ42 will be my breaking point, if that isnt good or has issues/performance problems still present from years prior in SC and offers nothing tangible in gameplay/story then uninstall it shall be
You guys know absolutely nothing about game development lmao 'it could be ready in 2 years' MF if they used magic, MAYBE 😂 People didn't hear them say their engine was shit and looking to get a new one? This game will not be out by 2030; and for people saying that's shitty, google was only good when it was in beta............ then it tried to make money off of the stuff it learned and now all you get is bought ads. BUT this game makes money in it's beta, why would it stop?....... or advance fast?
Man, I honestly thinks it depends. Depends of what 1.0 entails. For me, 1.0 is not multiple Start Systems, etc. I just want it to be a game, you jump in, do a quest or 2, grind for a bit, afk for hours, and then log out...and no hiccup in between, no AI standing around forgetting what they're supposed to do, no elevator bugging out, no 30k. I don't even mind if they only release it with Stanton only..I still get the sense of wonder, landing on a moon looking up and seeing the starry sky. And I think, achieving this is far more complicated than just adding more star systems...
Close to it being a game... I love SC but there's really not much to do in the verse currently. The current gameplay is earn money buy ships, rinse repeat. Wheres the story, other MMO's have quest lines, SC has some small and simple quest lines and there's no reason to actually do these missions. Not to mention most of the current game loops are currently in their initial version. The ships all need rework, armor, balance, this will take years. I'm saying 4 years to 1.0 minimum, probably 5-6. The game needs content and the last 6 months all we've had is a subsection of salvage, and now hunting T0, which I feel will be like box delivery missions but with the added part of killing the animal.
We need at least 5 systems. We need all major careers introduced and fleshed out to at tier 2. And we cannot, I repeat, we CANNOT have all of the issues we currently have. Why do you turn off your engines when you know you are storing your ship? Because there are times you spawn in your ship and it goes to the ceiling. Sometimes it just takes off on it's own. That cannot happen in a "full release". All the other annoying bugs in the game, you cannot happen in a full release. We live with it and laugh at it right now because it is "it's in alpha dude!". However, if they were to release this game with all the issues it has beyond performance issues, it will go the same way CP2077 did at launch. And it might not be able to recover itself from such a crappy release. I expect 3 year minimum. Maybe 5 years.
Chris Roberts was talking about the minimum viable product in 2016. You had an ATC about it 5 years ago. CIG and Roberts Space Industries will claim the game is already released if they face legal action. I think it's safe to assume there is a huge gulf between Chris Roberts idea of a minimum viable product and players idea of a minimum viable product.
Finance says it all, they have to release SQ42 and SC due to investors wanting their investment back ! Crowdfunded game not true, they have investors !! Follow the money... SQ42 end 2024, SC end of 2025.
It's still an absolute mess. Sure, there has been a major upturn in the quantity of what we're seeing recently but we still have no kind of proper physics system (ships and vehicles still bouncing around all over the place in various situations, things clipping through other things all over the place etc.) We are sooo far away from it being a game it's not true. There is no kind of objectives, no kind of end game content, no base building, no dynamic economy, one (or maybe two) star systems and so on. I'm honestly worried by all this talk of 1.0. If we get a 1.0 release any time in the next three years it will not be anywhere near to being the game I pledged for. As far as "RUclipsrs" and titles are concerned, the ones who always use highly inaccurate and clickbaity titles are bad ones in my book. I stopped following BoredGamer years ago exactly because of misleading titles and videos that consisted of him just reading reports or posts that CiG had made or speculating wildly on what "might" be coming. Nothing new and no intelligent insight.
We all need more real PvP experience in SC. And I am not talking fighting but mutual conflicting interests in same location. I really like Elite Dangerous these days in that regard, or Eve Online. They did a nice job with that, but they have working AI indeed. I don't know why, but for some reason, after playing SC alpha for a decade or so the variety in missions is not impressive any time I am launching the game. The ways to make money is almost the same as 4 years ago. I don't know why noone talks about that anymore (sure I am wrong since not monitoring SC YT that much) but dynamism and variety for missions is not really here yet but it was mentioned I don't know - 6 years ago? At least they can provide I don't know - names and numbers to be different. Or payment details and amounts to be more different and random. I don't know about other's experienced players but these days it is like you play everything on autopilot to grow some cash to spend it for something and that's it. Dealing with crashes, rubber banding, small bugs, etc at the same time. As much as I want to immerse myself into SC at the same time it is kinda unable to provide this. The best immersion I have really is when I just chilling and flying somewhere, or eva somewhere at the belt but this get boring after a while too and don't give you cash. Boring :/
All these people thinking that players will NEED other players to fly their 2-3 person ship instead of hired NPCs are ludicrous. There is almost no other announcement they could make that would destroy the project as fast as other players being a required necessity for any kind of multi crew ship gameplay. I've spend multiple full priced games worth of money on this project and I would drop it like a hot potato and never look back. I want to play alongside other people in my own ship, temporarily joining together to form a fleet. But never ever will I let other random players on my ship. I've seen multiple good games die because the developers listened only to hardcore players. These people almost never have good ideas for the long term success of a game. Thank the gods that Chris Roberts is stubborn and hellbent on making HIS vision and not THEIRS.
I think 2-4 years is generous. I'm saying 5. We still have the necessity for an economy solution (doesn't need to be dynamic, just needs to work past "Here's money, buy ships" and give you a purpose), base building, industrial loop via crafting, gold pass on MOST of the ships to bring them up to modern standards in terms of mechanics and engineering, copiloting still needs to have proper access to ship systems, bed logging needs to work 100% of the time, docking ports on ALL ships functioning outside of the 890, Data Running, etc. The list goes on and on. We're past the "framework" stage, and now we're at the "features and gameplay" stage. We're still quite a ways off from "polish and release" stage. Also, I'm still very confused as to why everyone likes to pretend like the game is 100% a multicrew game, like it was pitched as Sea of Thieves with spaceships, when we've known for years and have been reminded as of late that NPC Crew/AI Blades are still in the pipeline. They very clearly made that decision to cater to people who want bigger, specialized ships but enjoy solo play, or don't have time or the ability to schedule around friends/themselves to play with a full player crew/org. I think the people in the community who keep parroting "Lol SC is multicrew focused, maybe it's not your game" are huffing some heavy Org/PVP copium. Nah, the point of Star Citizen was to be *everyones* game. The point of Star Citizen was to play how *you* wanted to play, and to offer an unprecedentedly huge "space life simulator", and they've made clear their plans on offering those options for solo players, so I'm really confused as to why the community seems to be in denial about that.
NPC Crew is a dangerous topic that can only and absolutely has to be balanced by cost. An NPC should cost more than or the same as a player and perform worse than one. The problem is that the cost of a player isn't static. If you have play as a group of 5, your payout is 1/5th. If you play as a duo, your payout is half. The same rule has to apply to NPCs even though it doesn't make sense from an economical standpoint, otherwise Multicrew won't be viable enough. I don't wanna see org versus org battles filled up with NPCs and I think, no one would want that. As soon as their is the tiniest economical advantage to using an NPC crew rather than other players, Multicrew will die completely.
1.0 is nice to think about, but there is so much more that could/should be done. There is going to be a big push with SQ42 resources becoming available, but shouldn't rush things too much just because of it. Care should probably still be taken... Keep seeing the term "Evolution" pop up. Which can be the same as progression at points, but sometimes it isn't... I just worry that the game could "Evolve" into something less than it could have been. The whole point was to not have deadlines, reinvent wheels, and be in a perpetual state of polishing and addition of new systems. Can't waste this opportunity to make something like no one will probably ever see again...
I think the MVP is 2nd gen of each gameplay loop that we have now with all the star systems that connect directly to Stanton. So we need Terra, Magnus Pyro, and maybe Nyx. Mining, salvage, cargo, security. bounty hunting, medical, service, and repair need to be fleshed out to a point that they are viable and profitable. I don't think we need a quantum economy yet. Yes, the economy should be sort of dynamic and big events in the game should affect the local economy, but doing one mission or one cargo run shouldn't affect the economy. All the star systems need to be lived in and not as dead and empty. AI blades and NPc crew members would be great too, but if that is not there, I wouldn't be too upset.
I have been playing MMO's for the majority of my life, to one degree or another. I don't want a game that I CAN'T play solo. That doesn't mean I don't want to play in groups, but solo play HAS to be well supported. When I played WOW, I leveled mostly solo and I enjoyed casual interactions with other players. Once I hit max level, I started raiding and, obviously, group gameplay had to be a focus. However, then there was the daily quest grind and the grind for materials for upgrades. For the most part, I did all of that by myself. I probably spent just as much time playing solo as I did in raid/dungeon groups. Can you grind dailies with friends, yes. Can you grind materials with friends, also yes. However, some of the time you are chasing the same item and it just takes more time to do the thing you need to do. My point is, if CIG can't make the game in such a way that it is solo 'friendly,' it won't do well. Players will always find something that they prefer to do solo. If my barrier to playing solo, for instance, is that I need someone to swap fuses, that's not a compelling reasons to run with a friend. I want my friends to enhance my gameplay, not be needed to meet a viable level of fun.
They have a lot of resources working on SQ42 and the PU. It's hard to say what is possible and not, but I like that they seems focused on turning the PU into an actual game. I feel like 1.0 has no shot of living up to expectations built up through the years. Just look at the discussions for master modes and fps combat changes. There are going to be long lists and many videos made about what they failed to deliver, but there is no way to avoid that. I think SQ42 is much more important. If it is good enough, you can kind of just release the PU and new people won't really care that there isn't pets or whatever irrelevant thing long time followers of the project would expect. All I ask for in terms of 1.0 is for the game to function with stable enough servers, a decent economy including a variety of progression like reputation, base buildiong and crafting. If we get social features for orgs before or after doesn't matter to me, even things like mealstrom and control surfaces doesn't matter to me for 1.0. The game just needs to feel meaningful to play with no more wipes.
Star Citizen needs Server stability, Connection improvements, AI working properly, Client performance improvements (It needs to run at 60FPS stable at minimum) and then needs waaay more content for the existing gameplay loops and/or enough dynamic changes to it, to make it interesting for a longer period of time.
Crafting and base building with some sort of player influenced trading of resources for 1.0 is needed IMO. Bigger resource dependence gives way to multiple important play styles and loops. Bases need material so you should be able to buy them from players at varying prices like an auction house or stations need to only have stock based on what is actually brought in. This also makes pirating a more real play loop because you want their stuff so you don't always want to blow stuff up. Data Running however I'm fine with just being different cargo running. You have to have a ship that can hold data onboard and make it from point A to B but you aren't investing in the cargo and it can play a small role for something updating or whatever, or just a means to give a different way to do point A to B missions with a different skew. It could also lead to illegal versions of the same job where hacking is an actual skill based or time based task that needs protecting. It could be information on security fleets/known illegal information that triggers other quests. This could also be a lead in for stealth gameplay. I don't think full forms of this need to be ready for 1.0 but Crafting, base building, and actual player trading for salvaged/mined goods are.
Eve has never had a rollback. Imagine, a full game economy completely driven by players, for over 20 years, with no rollback. They adjust it with “scarcity” and resources control and money sinks
Let's be honest. CIG will NEVER release a true 1.0 game. They are burning through money to fast, there is too much content left to build and they haven't even really started debugging it beyond small QoL updates. But go ahead, keep thinking it's just around the corner.
I wonder how people ignore what is going on PTU wave 1 right now )) It is for a week already CIG makes a subpatch every day or two with new characteristics of weapons and characteristics of ships related to fighting. Every day or two they change hitpoints, damage, damage type, ship speed, projectile speed, firerate, firing mechanics like overcharge and so on, sometimes changes are opposite. It looks like they have no clear plan of changes and are very preoccupied trying to figure out these numbers from PTU statistics.
BG is the anti Mike. I love him but I come here for the grounded takes. Cause maybe SQ42 version 1.0 is soon, but fucking SC 1.0 is not coming anytime soon. If it does I'll sign up for a membership on his channel.
And also, i hate when People say, its been in development since 2012 bla bla. The game hasent been in real development, like with enough People and work that make sense, before 2018, so the game actually only have 6 years on it. So atleast and minimum 4 more years until some what done and 1.0 probably have to rush it in 4 years because of investors, but they could probably use 6 years in reality.
Even with the new patch on the EPTU today.. The game is still unplayable. But CIGs ability to look over numerous flaws. Then act like they have done something miraculous is displayed time after time.
I disagree with Mikes take on things like personal transport (as one example) not being needed for 1.0. I believe base level of minimal gameplay for each ship/profession needs to be there. If you were a player that only bought the Starliner, then you shouldn’t be left behind at 1.0 because CIG put more priority on someone else’s career path over yours.
I honestly see it turning out like EVE. There’s plenty of solo gameplay etc but the real end game stuff, etc will be org based. Including org owned/run planets/systems eventually
Let's be honest and look at 3.23, a patch that uses a lot of stuff from the past years of Sq42 development still can't be released in a bug free state in time. How are they supposed to deliver on all the other missing systems and get the quantity required for a 1.0 release in only a few years? I don't believe CIG is capable of releasing SC in the next 3 years.
Soon, the floodgates will open! Every year since 2016.
Considering that squadron 42 is still the focus and that this is probably a year away and after that we need integration of the technical debt to have working dynamic server meshing which is likely another year away after squadron releases, I think it might take some time. At that point we most likely need to overhaul(read create) the gamplay, gold pass on the ship fleet and update to make it work with whatever new systems we had to add and then start creating all the solar systems. My best guess would be at least 5 years away.
Really good thoughts, Mike. For example, I've not heard anyone else talk about the issues regarding PvP organisations and what their overarching goals might/should be. It's an important observation.
What I think a realistic timeline is for the game, is 4.0 Either end of summer or end of year. SQ42 Beta End of year with Citcon (alongside 4.0 if it doesnt come out in summer). SQ42 full release Q1-Q2 2025. Then i think once SQ42 is fully released CIG will focus for 3 years minimum building out game mechanics. If we can get DynamicSM working by the end of 2027 then it could be possible for a 1.0 to come out at the very end of 2027, very possibly early 2028. If not DynSM then honestly whenever they change that after 2028 is when a 1.0 will come. (this is assuming they are able to ramp up production of content in those 3 years past SQ42)
game wont release before dynamic server meshing is working 100%, we should see static server meshing with pyro end of year but full performance enhancements and refinery with the game code will take years, i would expect 2-3 years after sq42 releases.
Mike I think that as far as crafting goes, I think the distribution centers will be the main source of blueprints. I think you will go to the specific company’s DC do missions for them and build up rep and start getting rewarded with blueprints. On the other side, you will raid them/ infiltrate them to steal blueprints.
I am not holding my breath that they even deliver a proper ArcCorp within 2 years... We were told that the surface of ArcCorp was going to be accessible to players. Right now- the buildings and ships are superficial and like 1/3 scale (relative to the player). I understand that promises are going to be broken- but LZs cannot be the only places accessible to the player. That entire planet should be available to land/walk/shop/whatever. That alone is going to take 2 years.
I hope 1.0 isn’t close. If they call anything near what we have now as 1.0, it will hurt the game. May as well stay alpha for years more.
Another 12 years by their progress lol
I like how Bored named off a millions things that needs to be done and then turns around and say “Yep, should be ready in a year or 2” 😅
Based.
I could care less about 1.0 all I care about is having something to actually do in the game, and QOL improvements for things like UI, star map, etc.
The minimum prerequisite for the game to even be close to 1.0 is server stability and AI performing as intended, which isn't going to happen for a long time; add all the ships, planets, systems and features you want, but until the game runs smoothly and performs as intended, there's no chance in hell it's going to be met with anything but criticism and laughter.
Precisely. If it isnt clean and functional no ones going to want to touch this with a 10 foot stick. Hard enough getting people through bugs just to sit for another 15 minutes while we travel to do something else next thing theyre asleep lmao
you say that forgetting ppl still threw money at DCS way before it got any core updates and multithreading support to improve performance (it was bad a few years ago) 1.0 is just gunna be there glorified release so they can then say "oh hey live service now, keep supporting us please"
I have several friends interested in the game but absolutely refuse to play it until it's less buggy.
@@123TheCloopExactly. “We did it guys! Keep funding us please.”
DCS has scope, and the military @@123TheCloop
I put a google calendar reminder in for Oct 18th 2025 to come back and watch this to see how far the game has actually progressed :)
Where are my "in 3 years" citizens!? :) o7
EDIT: in case it wasn't obvious my guess is 3 years min. ;)
yeah 3 years minimum is my guess too. Good to see ya Alita!
@@hankmoody8490 Stalker.
Kidding! Hey hey Moody. :P
It's always 2 years away
I was always a 2 years away guy myself lmao
Hoooold the line! It's coming in year 2142 we are almost 1/4th of the way there if you delude yourself😂
This game needs so much optimization and polishing work. Like atleast 1 full year of polishing on things that are currently existing in the game. If they wanted to drop it with just the features in the game now. And they want to add another 3 or 4 years worth of features. So add another 6 month to a year for polish on that too. I’m thinking 1.0 by 2030. That is if they want to release a nice, finished, polished game. Of course they could drop 1.0 with still all the bugs and unpolished features much like Ark survival evolved did. But I really want the game to feel like a game. And not have to fill the gaps with my imagination. (Also I won’t be happy until I can play as a banu. First full release 2.0 expansion?)
thing is they are at least 1-2 years in the polishing phase for SQ42 now considering they are porting a lot of stuff from SQ42 over to SC, while the code is the same, its implementation isnt so SQ42 needs to finish its polish really before SC 1.0 can even start its polish phase so its arguably 3-5 years out imo, ships still need to be finished, star systems still need to be finished (christ we still havent got pyro yet to live)
they could polish all they want without server meshing working our fps will never go up some for performance, the game is just to heavy to run as it is now.
My core belief is the thing holding back everything is server meshing. Until they master that and get it working in game, we will never see meaningful game play added. Everything will continue to be these bare bones tier 0 implementations of the game loops. Why? Because the servers are barely hanging on as it is. They can't handle any more complex gameplay than this.
Server performance is why all the NPCs do nothing. Hard to add fun complex missions without NPCs involved. Server performance is why they don't bother to add animals or fish or birds. They'd just stand around like NPCs do. Server performance is why mining is the most evolved game loop, all you need is a ship and some rocks to make it work. Server performance is why we can't have proper quest givers with audio dialogue. Everything is text in our mobiglass.
Server meshing should fix all this..... and if it does my hope is the gameplay floodgates will FINALLY open, and we will see the devs starting to be able to implement all the things they've been talking about. We'll see game loops finally move to tier 1 and beyond. Cities will begin to feel alive. We'll be able to follow NPCs around and watch them do their jobs, see lots of ships in the verse flying around. It will start to feel like a living, breathing MMO that feels like things have changed every time you log in.
THEN we can start talking about 1.0 dates. Then we will be close to a full game in my opinion.
Kingship invasions would 100% change the dynamic when it comes to solo play.
If a capital ship capable of deploying 100s of fighters infested a system making "normal" gameplay loops impossible people wanting to play solo would be trumped and everyone would be forced to work together.
Xenothreat is some cacameme bullshit, xenothreat needs to be what its named. That alone would make this game 100x more dope. Economy or not.
Beta 2028 release in 2030, been sayin it since 2020. People called me crazy, stupid, salty, etc. Happy to be proven wrong, but 2025 is legit insane or disingenuous.
I've been shat on so much for saying in 2018 there was NO CHANCE of Pyro to come in 2020... Once CIG gives crumbs of progress, a whooole lot of the player base go apeshit crazy and start howling that the content floodgates are open and release is just around the corner.
I think with us not hearing from tony z and quantum in so long tells me there are working on something different now honestly
This. Quantum hit a wall or is gonna be a mic drop surprise
Nah it’s just waiting for meshing like AI, desync, and basically everything else.
@@CitizenScott honestly they have been shadow working on so much shit it's impressive
@@beardedbarnstormer9577 Like what
@@CitizenScott tons of graphics enhancements and vulkan really, impressed at the rapid iteration for something very lightly touched on as in progress
Its insane to bring up timelines for 1.0 when Chris only brought it up to say they're FINALLY going to start putting something solid on paper as to what ships in 1.0
Never trust any videos that present Star Citizen with a positive attitude related to timing, CIG never delivered anything on time.
My estimation is that SQ42 will be released in 2-4 years, the end of 2026 would be my "optimistic" expectation, and early 2028 for my "pessimist" expectation.
Now for the PU fully 1.0 release? Sheesh, I wouldn`t expect to be ready this decade.
Keep in mind that I`m a realistic person, I`m not at all a "dreamer", and I filter all the BS from CIG marketing, for perspective, SC is lacking so many features that have been shown to us already.
-Sandworm.
-Server Meshing.
-Pyro.
-New UI.
-Galaxy Map.
-NPCs.
-Base building.
-Apartment ownership.
-Hangar ownership.
-Ship internal customization.
-Raids.
-Aliens.
-Crafting.
-Bounty Hunting 2.0.
-Exploration gameplay loop.
-Science gameplay loop.
-Engineering gameplay loop.
-Expedition gameplay loop.
And many more....
For many years Bored drank too much of the Kool-Aid
Yea he’s such child, so easily duped he’s the kind of person who keeps throwing money on the roulette wheel until he wins.
I actually agree with Mike, i mean look at what we HAVE in-game within the last 6 months. Here are my thoughts:
At the current pacing i would expect Pyro to release before the end of 2025. If we get it before 2024 is over i would be ecstatic! But i try to keep it real here :)
After Pyro is released, we will probably get (god bless) Modular ships! Base Building. After base building is polished up a little bit, we will probably get the Progression we are begging for.
Once we get those and of course a whole bunch of Amazing ship sales in between, so the marketing team can chill out a little with the "Exclusive" Ships.
After all of that we just might get some info within 1-2 years about future Star Systems. SQ42 i expect in late 2025 - 2026 to release. CIG probably wants to get SC in a "1.0 Stable Beta" Version around the time SQ42 is released. So they can use the marketing slogan "An alpha of 10+ years of development finally enters its BETA!" and make everyone excited around that.
More ship sales in between....
Then i finally see after 3-5 years THIS game finally coming together, if it keeps the current pacing! :) Only after SQ42 is fully out there, do i expect SC to finally get some love.
However, that is all in good hopes. I just need to put a hard hold on my spending, being a concierge is enough for me, i`m done. Until i see tangible progression, reputation system, new mission types & NEW game play loops & much more.
before all of that they have to get server meshing working, that is what is holding most things back right now, the servers can barely handles what we have now.
Lets face it, they have about 3-4 years of Tech Debt theyve managed to build...
Let them release 4.0 this summer, the base building and then I would be ready to hear them talk about 1.0
Im not, even with based building and pyro this game is nothing like what I personally expected it to become.
4.0 is end of the year
@@ludovics7078 yeah SM and Pyro at the end of the year and SQ42 in two years like every years 😉
Which year
"4.0 this summer" lol
I will put this game in my Testament for my grandchildren. This is when i predict it will come out.
Boredgamer is one of the worst clickbaiters unfortunately.... he reduced his credibility to 0 already long ago
1.0 is a 203X thing - at least if we assume that we have stable gameplay and no further wipes. You gotta face reality
Bored has been saying 1.0 for the past 5 years. Him and ole Space Tomato are some die hard sycophants when it comes to Star Citizen. I will type this out again. If you look at what was promised and what we have currently in the game, there is absolutely NO way we get to a 1.0 Live version within the next 8-10 years. CIG would have to start axing promised features left and right to make that happen. Just the scaled back number of systems in game from 100 to just 12 or so will take them YEARS to complete alone. Now, toss in all the ship back log. Jon Crew said it will take them 12-18 months to complete just ONE capital ship and how many do we have left to see the light of day? Alien races, Earth landing zone, player housing, player bases with base building, atmospheric flight models, ship components, AI server blades, Quantum economy, NPC crews, passenger flights, VIP flights, in-game racing teams and leagues, crafting, ship modularity, ground vehicles, ROADS, settlements, outposts, in game news reporting. I'm sure I'm missing features too. ALL of that in 2 years? In what time space continuum would that ever happen?! Guys... just stop with the 1.0 stuff. Not happening anytime soon... if ever fully realized. But sure enough, folks will sit through another year of Citcon hype and start squealing 1.0 next year or the year after that. And here I thought fentanyl was America's scourge when in reality, it's Star Citizen copium!
I can’t take anything bored gamer says seriously. Man speculates too much the fact that this is even a thing just pushes me further from Mikes content.
Great show Mike, pretty much agree with you. For me 1.0 is 5-6 star systems, npc crew, economy. Unfortunately 1.0 is at least 2 years out. Keep it up bro, peace
i have a hard time believing SC is going to be here in fewer than 5 years. they still have to release SQ42 and then deal with a bunch of inevitable bugs and tweaks. there is still a lot of server tech that needs to be tested and implemented to give SC the full scale that it needs. base building is going to take a while, star engine is continuing optimization, improving flora and fauna to make the planets feel alive, developing all the gameplay loops. there is so much stuff.
Them investors ain't gonna pay themselves.
IMO there is no point in even speculating about a 1.0 release until two things happen. First thing is Sq42 released. Not close, not having a hard release date. Until we have Sq42 in our hands and it is good there is no point talking about a 1.0 PU release until that happens it's pipe dream. Second thing that we need is stable dynamic server meshing. Those are the two key points that until we have them there is zero possibility of a 1.0 release happening. Even after we have those two things a 1.0 release is likely still multiple years away but it's not even a discussion worth having until then.
Boredgamer is in a fantasy land, he said ALIENS!??? HAHAHA They can't even get the basics right!!!
CIG didn't think this far ahead as Mike did. They just pasted crap together and are figuring it out as they go along. This will be EVE, just in first person view. A game like this should not have an end game. You just keep adding things to it. There's sooo much that needs to be done, it's laughable. CIG FLEXED THERE MUSCLES BEFORE THEY STRETCHED FIRST. Now there hurting bad.
I don't watched BG anymore. He's just a hyping fan boy that always pumps everything up like it's the greatest thing ever, knowing that it likely won't be. It's a bit disingenuous. Plus he regurgitates information constantly by making more videos about the same "news".
There is absolutely no way that they release the promised game in two years. This demo that we have is nowhere near a finished game. There has to be at least 100 systems, server stuff sorted out, actual missions, etc. How many years did it take them to "finish" S42? SC is SO much bigger. I am not holding my breath that we see a 1.0 until at LEAST 7 years from now. Not a chance.
Bored Gamer is well informed about ongoing development, yet he constantly makes toxicly optimistic predictions. Had to stop following him.
I like Bored Gamer, love his enthusiasm, his optimism. But I fear on this issue, an SC 1.0, he is way off the mark.
I hate boredgamer, dude is just yapping about nothing every video and makes the most clickbait video titles...
We're going to look back on this in 4 to 6 years and laugh at how foolish any of us were to think the game would be released in 2 years or less from now.
Switched off as soon as I heard BoredGamer.... Really nothing other than speculation
BoredGamer is just milking YT clicks with his baity 12minute videos
Minimum 5 years before 1.0. I don't believe is that close, as the statement from the CEO sounds like "we have now finished the tech stuff" and they are now starting to create the gameplay loop.
what is suppose to be progression in star citizen…. there is no character progression… everyone already bought and paid for the ships they want… what are we doing here guys. Is there going to be unlock evemts or what? What is the reason to play….
It is a great question! Imagine GTA5 if you had already bought all the cars and apartments. You would not grind those missions more than a few times.
@@Biter1975 Reputation could be a key progression item. However, I think they really need to expand more progression gameplay. I think they could continue to lean in on missions. Xeno threat, or even the bounty threat level unlocks are simple examples of progressive missions.
What they said many years ago is that ships are just the starting point. The real progression is supposed to be components. The ships they currently offer are supposed to be equipped with only Tier 1-2 components with Tier 3 being a rare exception. Tiers are supposed to go up to Tier 10 which are locked behind reputation, game knowledge and skill. But this plan was years ago, so who knows. Components are not insured and will be lost on ship destruction.
Collecting rare loot and trinkets from around the verse is supposed to be another thing. Beyond that is the plan that each career is so fleshed out and engaging coupled with the dynamic AI system that you just keep playing because its fun.
Shill gamer at it again lol
The game will release and the dev team will be in walkers or wheel chairs with full heads of gray hair.
Bet him a Drake Kraken. Do it. I heard talks of a bet but no bets placed.
10 years, minimum. They don't even have 1 working solar system yet.
I dont even think SQ42 will be released for another 4 years and I had the mind set that SQ42 release would happen before 1.0 . The reason being why I think SQ42 wont release for another 4 years is that CIG maybe have already cannibalized a significant portion of their protentional sales of the game already. they probably know it too which is why they are started talking about releasing on SQ42 on console. That way they can actually have good sale numbers on release. even if the game is perfect 10/10, if half of all start citizen players bought it already, that doesnt leave much left over for sales on release day. The best selling game of 2023 was Hogwarts legacy. a Good game from a massive IP meant to appeal to as much people as possible that released on all platforms and it took 1 year to sell 22 million copies. SQ42 would be a niche game released on PC only with a large player base who already bought it. The console market hasnt been touched yet. though they wouldn't release on this generation of consoles, they would wait for the next one which would be released in 2027-2028. I think 1.0 would be released after SQ42 or at the same time. I don't see 1.0 happening soon then SQ42 after
He is actually right. 4.0 Q3 2024, 1.0 before end 2025. You are also mostly gay.
I'm just curious as to how someone is 'mostly' gay.
The way I see it is: whenever we talk about 1.0, that’s Beta 1.0, not release. We might have enough gameplay systems and game loops in a few years, but not content or missions, locations, ships, etc.
You know, the more I watch your content and see how things are. I'm starting to understand why your name is saltymike. I'm starting to agree with everything more and more. I believe it when I see it. Keep up the saltiness!
He has the most realistic view of the project from all the different SC content creators I've seen since I joined this god damn dream 10 years ago.
47:48 yikes. kind of embarrassing...
Then there is possibility GTA 6 in 2025
Bored is such a cringe shill
Star Citizen 1.0 not before GTA 6
11:07 holy sh*t someone finally said it. Having to make titles like this is quite literally what many youtubers are forced to do to get engagement.
Also, yes. 18 months for 1.0 is a super tall order. Is that the bottles of copium talking?
Alright. BEFORE watching this at all. A little theory crafting! -----Near the bottom I have the post video comment.----
IMO: (Hopeful but I think not too hopeful with the recent Server Meshing progress)
0% we get 1.0 this year.
50% we get 1.0 Citcon 2025 (1.5 yrs)
95% we get 1.0 Citcon 2026 with SQ42 release. (2.5yrs)
Biggeest reason for this is the old claim of 5 systems being the "minimum for release". So we kinda have to have SQ42 for Odin to drop. That would give us Stanton, Pyro, Nyx, Odin. Only one more system to call it "5 systems minimum for release". In terms of the 5th system it obviously would have to be attached to 1 of those 4.
So options are: -Magnus, -Terra, -Hadrian, -Castra, -Cano, -Oso, -Tohil, -Bremen, -Tanga, -Kellog, -Virgil. Of 11 options, 7 are UEE controlled, 2 are "Developing", 1 is Unclaimed, 1 is Vanduul.
Now, the hinge point. While SQ42 takes place primarily in Odin, it BEGINS during the Battle of Vega II. So I'd imagine there is a decent amount of the Vega system developed that is well hidden due to SQ42. And only 1 system connect to Vega from the original 4 mentioned above.... Bremen.
Stats on Bremem.
-6.14au (could change with change to Pyro size so potentially about the same as Stanton)
-4 planets (Bremen I -protoplanet with no resources) (Bremen II -home to Consolidated Outland and "sparsely populated") (Bremen III -heavily mined coreless planet) (Bremen IV -Massive ice giant too risky to harvest) So I'd guess 2 easy to throw together planets, 1 with some detail, and 1 heavy detail planet.
-4 Jump Points (well spread out but keeps it quite close to the SQ42 systems and original systems)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay after watching this.... wow. I think this really highlights the CIG DESPERATELY needs to define 1.0. They say 1.0 "release". Does that mean release like "we've released but we'll keep updating?" Or does that mean 1.0 release into BETA? I just assumed 1.0 was release into BETA. But it's very clear that doesn't seem to be the common mindset.
Those are two very different statements. Mainly due to the fact that an actual "release" is a bit impossible within 3-4 years when we're technically still EARLY ALPHA. If 1.0 is a BETA release and what CIG would compare to an "early access release" that so many games do on steam they wouldn't be in the wrong. IF they explain it's still BETA state. Personally, I see BETA being 1.0 when I really think about how much is still needed to even start in terms of gameplay loops (zero science, zero exploration, zero farming, etc). And I'd still partly bet that we get a decent run of systems in that Beta "release". That's where I start to think Pyro in 6months , Nyx 1yr , Odin 1.5 -2yrs, SQ42 and Beta 2-3yrs out.
Another 2 years to "feature complete", 2 more to beta, 2 years in beta. So I expect 2030 for release.
No you forgot that Robers himself said that "an mmo is never finished" so in 2030 SC will then be in early access for another 5 years minimum. 😉
if Asmon plays Sq42 with the current style of UI, imagine the cooking CIG will get from him and his massive followers, i have little hope for CIG to realise how bad their UI is looking even after the update
Right! At this point anything other than a near perfect launch will kill the game in a month
@@frogger2011ify this games going to always have a following... How big of a following time will tell lol
@@Cmdr_V yh it will have a following, just not a big one. thats sad reality of FOMO and money sink with ship costs. but I do think SC would need a near perfect launch to be good (sad but true) it set that bar itself being the highest funded game in history and still growing atm
@@frogger2011ifythe method of monetization and extent of it has ensured they will have a long term playerbase (though it may not be enough to keep it running without private servers).
Many will be unwilling to accept that our large buyins were a mistake and that the external nay sayers were right (if it flops) and stick with and defend it no mattrr what.
Richard Tyrer said he wants to give us quarterly big updates! 6 months since citizencon but they have given us nothing?!
nothing? 3.23 will be out at max mid may and is already in testing
3.23 Its a reskin of what we have. And a bunch of redoing of what we already have.
@@Silveragayet still feels very lack luster and buggy af
I dont want star citizen to lose its ambitions
That's the reason i keep follow the development of this game bro
SC 1.0 is a long way off yet. There is enough to do with 3.23, progressing to 4.0 and Pyro while maintaining the gains built up from 3.23 onwards, when you have three, maybe 4, or 5 Systems in game, with everything running well, INCLUDING the content for each system THEN the possible release of a Star Citizen 1.0 becomes a more realistic possibility.
Of course, the OTHER issue with regard to Star Citizen: Longevity, servers cost money, maintaining the game costs money, iteration of features, making existing missions better, improving ship functionality and creating new content costs money, and lastly CIG needs to pay it's employees, all costs money. So the funding model becomes the thing. Ship sales alone, whatever the bundle size, and the current subscriptions will not fill that bowl sufficiently. I almost forgot the OTHER important thing.....Progression, rewards for time spent playing, skill sets achieved, reputation earned, wealth generated, etc. etc. All the above matter to a STAR CITIZEN 1.0
To me, Minimum 5 to full release, but ad infinitum and as many needed to solve the unforeseen hurdles that will appear along the way. But minimum 5 years.
Then you go on and say "If you've been following SC for a VERY LONG TIME you'll remember conversations about never having crafting in SC". And I was like Lol, that isn't so old, I've been saying that like a year ago... And fuck me it's been already 6 years, and by that time I was following since already some years... How fast does a decade go by...
"Non youtube people" are 99.993% of the planet. If you accept Capitalist realism as an excuse for RUclipsr's lying to us, why not just accept this as true of everything?
"Non CIG people are so funny. This is how game development is. If you don't tap the saps, and string them along through 'early access' and FOMO, you're never going to compete."
Oooooh you asked if this (insert game mechanic) makes this game fun. That's a major foul according to the SC community.
In all honesty, that has been my take on this for years now. Started when they made the quantum drive more "shiny", hit harder when they made water physics for SHOT GLASSES! I absolutely HATE the need to play twister with my pour hands just to open a door or interact with a corpse: thankfully they have sorta fixed this recently, but they are still going out of they're way to make this SUPER real life rather than super fun. I don't need a day job in a space game. Eve Online exist for that.
If 1.0 is going to be the minimum viable product as described by CR at CitCon (5 star systems, a working economy, sufficient stability that your group can play for 2 hours without losing a character to bugs, base building), I don't expect it to be delivered for at least 6 years. 8 years is a more realistic figure. For all of the things BoredGamer is expecting, I think it will take at least 10 years. If they slap the 1.0 label on it at any point within the next 4 years, the game will be ridiculed and crash and burn.
So I suppose if Star Citizen 1.0 releases before 2034, BoredGamer's clickbait title is correct, at least in my case. I just won't have any interest in playing it.
1.0 is a fully functional Terra.
High capacity, High Security, tons of NPCs. It also has to work. 2030 for real. Default location for all the noobs too.
They can also try and do 4.0 by end of the year. Then every year do a 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, …, run up to 1.0.0 in 2030
Sure the changes might not be as big as 3.0 and 4.0, but it would still be a good runway to build hype for 1.0.0.
1.0 will release (in whatever state) at the same time or just before Squadron 42 because CIG wouldn’t want to miss the opportunity to convert new players to their live service game, Star Citizen.
For me, this just seems obvious! So is 1.0 moving to a subscription model e.g. 30$ per month subscription (or buy a 360$ ship and get 12 months free subscription).
I'd say 1.0 is 2 years at a *minimum*. Realistically? 2028. There is way too much to do, still. 3.23 does look like the "set-up" patch to get us to 4.0 and its branch. Then, we'll be in that 4.0 branch for another 3 years until beta.
At the very least, I see SQ42 for holiday 2025.
37:05 You mention something that people could experience with a FPS POV and its own taste. SC is the potential Eve Online successor with its own taste. Its different because SC you are not a "race", so you don't start with buffs attributed to your own ship race. But the Player Economy and the Org End Game is 100% important to make the game a success instead of just a great looking meh. BUT you need to have more than 100 systems for this. Owning land/region and systems, 100 system is a major bottle neck.
Mike raised too many good points in this video for me not to resubscribe. Feels warm and fuzzy to be home again
If we are lucky.....or actually Our children or grand children are, it will be in this eon 1.0 will be released. Just joking...personally I have given up focusing to much of the future, and more focusing on what we get out of each patch release, cause all Hype started great with the 3.23 patch coming up, but total buggy. I prefer stability, instead of lotsa features that do not work as they should. 1.0 should arrive when all the basics and the actual game play for the different features are working and give us game play. That is just my point of view. ThanX for this react vid Mike! Cheers!
So much fuzzy terminology - Is 'minimum viable product' what will work in the market for fulfill promises to backers? Different people are on a different place on that spectrum. There are multiple complications beyond that, such as constantly changing promises, mutually exclusive promises, different scopes at different times. 'Minimum viable product' for a project with no public announcements is very complicated as is; adding all the Star Citizen specific complications into the mix makes reasonable discussion or consensus basically impossible.
So to provide the answer, what is the question?
Whenever 1.0 is released, it needs the obvious features and functions for the various ships to be utilized and environments to be enjoyed, but it also needs to have the small additions demonstrated over the years, ie: Ship Naming, AI blades, etc...
I feel there should be 6, known star systems and 7, to be found by players with long duration/range exploration fleets, either by finding the system or a jumppoint to the new system, found about every year and a half to nearly three years (15.5 to 20.3) and maybe a few others? ;-)
I've considered data running ships like spy ships, gathering data, reconnaissance, etc... and getting it to those who paid for it or just need it?
less than 2 years for 1.0 is hyper unrealistic IF we assume they aim to get everything done by then. atm economy is still a god damn mess, no quanta in site. will dont even have the (i think 5) star systems they are aiming for upon release then up to 100 in the future (could be wrong here but I do remember them giving a figure for a 1.0 release a few years back)
Either way, gameplay loop atm is just non existent. the starting gameplay loop is literally nothing and just forces ppl away or into dropping big money for ships (that needs to get sorted) like give us starter mining ships that dont cost like £130+ otherwise you are forced to do basic cargo missions/bounties but with ship costs going up in a game with no proper economy or gameplay loops etc. the game just doesnt have enough substence imo to be 1.0 ready. I just dont see it happening.
IF 1.0 releases in 2 years then mark my words CIG will hide under the cover of "live service now keep supporting us" this sustainability with ship sales is going to plummit and its going to happen when 1.0 releases or SQ42 does because ppl will get a good idea of what to expect if either one is finished before the other and SQ42s trailer imo showed nothing beyond what SC PU already has to offer. I've got a about £450 in SC and SQ42 will be my breaking point, if that isnt good or has issues/performance problems still present from years prior in SC and offers nothing tangible in gameplay/story then uninstall it shall be
You guys know absolutely nothing about game development lmao 'it could be ready in 2 years' MF if they used magic, MAYBE 😂 People didn't hear them say their engine was shit and looking to get a new one? This game will not be out by 2030; and for people saying that's shitty, google was only good when it was in beta............ then it tried to make money off of the stuff it learned and now all you get is bought ads. BUT this game makes money in it's beta, why would it stop?....... or advance fast?
Lol if you don't think boredgamer believes the 2026 release, you don't know bored lol (
Man, I honestly thinks it depends. Depends of what 1.0 entails. For me, 1.0 is not multiple Start Systems, etc. I just want it to be a game, you jump in, do a quest or 2, grind for a bit, afk for hours, and then log out...and no hiccup in between, no AI standing around forgetting what they're supposed to do, no elevator bugging out, no 30k. I don't even mind if they only release it with Stanton only..I still get the sense of wonder, landing on a moon looking up and seeing the starry sky.
And I think, achieving this is far more complicated than just adding more star systems...
Close to it being a game... I love SC but there's really not much to do in the verse currently. The current gameplay is earn money buy ships, rinse repeat.
Wheres the story, other MMO's have quest lines, SC has some small and simple quest lines and there's no reason to actually do these missions.
Not to mention most of the current game loops are currently in their initial version.
The ships all need rework, armor, balance, this will take years.
I'm saying 4 years to 1.0 minimum, probably 5-6.
The game needs content and the last 6 months all we've had is a subsection of salvage, and now hunting T0, which I feel will be like box delivery missions but with the added part of killing the animal.
We need at least 5 systems. We need all major careers introduced and fleshed out to at tier 2. And we cannot, I repeat, we CANNOT have all of the issues we currently have. Why do you turn off your engines when you know you are storing your ship? Because there are times you spawn in your ship and it goes to the ceiling. Sometimes it just takes off on it's own. That cannot happen in a "full release". All the other annoying bugs in the game, you cannot happen in a full release. We live with it and laugh at it right now because it is "it's in alpha dude!". However, if they were to release this game with all the issues it has beyond performance issues, it will go the same way CP2077 did at launch. And it might not be able to recover itself from such a crappy release.
I expect 3 year minimum. Maybe 5 years.
Chris Roberts was talking about the minimum viable product in 2016. You had an ATC about it 5 years ago. CIG and Roberts Space Industries will claim the game is already released if they face legal action. I think it's safe to assume there is a huge gulf between Chris Roberts idea of a minimum viable product and players idea of a minimum viable product.
Finance says it all, they have to release SQ42 and SC due to investors wanting their investment back !
Crowdfunded game not true, they have investors !! Follow the money... SQ42 end 2024, SC end of 2025.
It's still an absolute mess. Sure, there has been a major upturn in the quantity of what we're seeing recently but we still have no kind of proper physics system (ships and vehicles still bouncing around all over the place in various situations, things clipping through other things all over the place etc.) We are sooo far away from it being a game it's not true. There is no kind of objectives, no kind of end game content, no base building, no dynamic economy, one (or maybe two) star systems and so on. I'm honestly worried by all this talk of 1.0. If we get a 1.0 release any time in the next three years it will not be anywhere near to being the game I pledged for.
As far as "RUclipsrs" and titles are concerned, the ones who always use highly inaccurate and clickbaity titles are bad ones in my book. I stopped following BoredGamer years ago exactly because of misleading titles and videos that consisted of him just reading reports or posts that CiG had made or speculating wildly on what "might" be coming. Nothing new and no intelligent insight.
We all need more real PvP experience in SC. And I am not talking fighting but mutual conflicting interests in same location. I really like Elite Dangerous these days in that regard, or Eve Online. They did a nice job with that, but they have working AI indeed. I don't know why, but for some reason, after playing SC alpha for a decade or so the variety in missions is not impressive any time I am launching the game. The ways to make money is almost the same as 4 years ago. I don't know why noone talks about that anymore (sure I am wrong since not monitoring SC YT that much) but dynamism and variety for missions is not really here yet but it was mentioned I don't know - 6 years ago? At least they can provide I don't know - names and numbers to be different. Or payment details and amounts to be more different and random. I don't know about other's experienced players but these days it is like you play everything on autopilot to grow some cash to spend it for something and that's it. Dealing with crashes, rubber banding, small bugs, etc at the same time. As much as I want to immerse myself into SC at the same time it is kinda unable to provide this. The best immersion I have really is when I just chilling and flying somewhere, or eva somewhere at the belt but this get boring after a while too and don't give you cash. Boring :/
All these people thinking that players will NEED other players to fly their 2-3 person ship instead of hired NPCs are ludicrous. There is almost no other announcement they could make that would destroy the project as fast as other players being a required necessity for any kind of multi crew ship gameplay. I've spend multiple full priced games worth of money on this project and I would drop it like a hot potato and never look back.
I want to play alongside other people in my own ship, temporarily joining together to form a fleet. But never ever will I let other random players on my ship.
I've seen multiple good games die because the developers listened only to hardcore players. These people almost never have good ideas for the long term success of a game. Thank the gods that Chris Roberts is stubborn and hellbent on making HIS vision and not THEIRS.
I think 2-4 years is generous. I'm saying 5. We still have the necessity for an economy solution (doesn't need to be dynamic, just needs to work past "Here's money, buy ships" and give you a purpose), base building, industrial loop via crafting, gold pass on MOST of the ships to bring them up to modern standards in terms of mechanics and engineering, copiloting still needs to have proper access to ship systems, bed logging needs to work 100% of the time, docking ports on ALL ships functioning outside of the 890, Data Running, etc.
The list goes on and on. We're past the "framework" stage, and now we're at the "features and gameplay" stage. We're still quite a ways off from "polish and release" stage.
Also, I'm still very confused as to why everyone likes to pretend like the game is 100% a multicrew game, like it was pitched as Sea of Thieves with spaceships, when we've known for years and have been reminded as of late that NPC Crew/AI Blades are still in the pipeline. They very clearly made that decision to cater to people who want bigger, specialized ships but enjoy solo play, or don't have time or the ability to schedule around friends/themselves to play with a full player crew/org.
I think the people in the community who keep parroting "Lol SC is multicrew focused, maybe it's not your game" are huffing some heavy Org/PVP copium. Nah, the point of Star Citizen was to be *everyones* game. The point of Star Citizen was to play how *you* wanted to play, and to offer an unprecedentedly huge "space life simulator", and they've made clear their plans on offering those options for solo players, so I'm really confused as to why the community seems to be in denial about that.
NPC Crew is a dangerous topic that can only and absolutely has to be balanced by cost. An NPC should cost more than or the same as a player and perform worse than one. The problem is that the cost of a player isn't static. If you have play as a group of 5, your payout is 1/5th. If you play as a duo, your payout is half. The same rule has to apply to NPCs even though it doesn't make sense from an economical standpoint, otherwise Multicrew won't be viable enough. I don't wanna see org versus org battles filled up with NPCs and I think, no one would want that. As soon as their is the tiniest economical advantage to using an NPC crew rather than other players, Multicrew will die completely.
1.0 is nice to think about, but there is so much more that could/should be done. There is going to be a big push with SQ42 resources becoming available, but shouldn't rush things too much just because of it. Care should probably still be taken...
Keep seeing the term "Evolution" pop up. Which can be the same as progression at points, but sometimes it isn't... I just worry that the game could "Evolve" into something less than it could have been. The whole point was to not have deadlines, reinvent wheels, and be in a perpetual state of polishing and addition of new systems. Can't waste this opportunity to make something like no one will probably ever see again...
I think the MVP is 2nd gen of each gameplay loop that we have now with all the star systems that connect directly to Stanton. So we need Terra, Magnus Pyro, and maybe Nyx.
Mining, salvage, cargo, security. bounty hunting, medical, service, and repair need to be fleshed out to a point that they are viable and profitable.
I don't think we need a quantum economy yet. Yes, the economy should be sort of dynamic and big events in the game should affect the local economy, but doing one mission or one cargo run shouldn't affect the economy.
All the star systems need to be lived in and not as dead and empty.
AI blades and NPc crew members would be great too, but if that is not there, I wouldn't be too upset.
I have been playing MMO's for the majority of my life, to one degree or another. I don't want a game that I CAN'T play solo. That doesn't mean I don't want to play in groups, but solo play HAS to be well supported. When I played WOW, I leveled mostly solo and I enjoyed casual interactions with other players. Once I hit max level, I started raiding and, obviously, group gameplay had to be a focus. However, then there was the daily quest grind and the grind for materials for upgrades. For the most part, I did all of that by myself. I probably spent just as much time playing solo as I did in raid/dungeon groups. Can you grind dailies with friends, yes. Can you grind materials with friends, also yes. However, some of the time you are chasing the same item and it just takes more time to do the thing you need to do. My point is, if CIG can't make the game in such a way that it is solo 'friendly,' it won't do well. Players will always find something that they prefer to do solo. If my barrier to playing solo, for instance, is that I need someone to swap fuses, that's not a compelling reasons to run with a friend. I want my friends to enhance my gameplay, not be needed to meet a viable level of fun.
They have a lot of resources working on SQ42 and the PU. It's hard to say what is possible and not, but I like that they seems focused on turning the PU into an actual game. I feel like 1.0 has no shot of living up to expectations built up through the years. Just look at the discussions for master modes and fps combat changes. There are going to be long lists and many videos made about what they failed to deliver, but there is no way to avoid that.
I think SQ42 is much more important. If it is good enough, you can kind of just release the PU and new people won't really care that there isn't pets or whatever irrelevant thing long time followers of the project would expect.
All I ask for in terms of 1.0 is for the game to function with stable enough servers, a decent economy including a variety of progression like reputation, base buildiong and crafting. If we get social features for orgs before or after doesn't matter to me, even things like mealstrom and control surfaces doesn't matter to me for 1.0. The game just needs to feel meaningful to play with no more wipes.
Star Citizen needs Server stability, Connection improvements, AI working properly, Client performance improvements (It needs to run at 60FPS stable at minimum) and then needs waaay more content for the existing gameplay loops and/or enough dynamic changes to it, to make it interesting for a longer period of time.
Crafting and base building with some sort of player influenced trading of resources for 1.0 is needed IMO. Bigger resource dependence gives way to multiple important play styles and loops. Bases need material so you should be able to buy them from players at varying prices like an auction house or stations need to only have stock based on what is actually brought in. This also makes pirating a more real play loop because you want their stuff so you don't always want to blow stuff up. Data Running however I'm fine with just being different cargo running. You have to have a ship that can hold data onboard and make it from point A to B but you aren't investing in the cargo and it can play a small role for something updating or whatever, or just a means to give a different way to do point A to B missions with a different skew. It could also lead to illegal versions of the same job where hacking is an actual skill based or time based task that needs protecting. It could be information on security fleets/known illegal information that triggers other quests. This could also be a lead in for stealth gameplay. I don't think full forms of this need to be ready for 1.0 but Crafting, base building, and actual player trading for salvaged/mined goods are.
Eve has never had a rollback. Imagine, a full game economy completely driven by players, for over 20 years, with no rollback. They adjust it with “scarcity” and resources control and money sinks
Let's be honest. CIG will NEVER release a true 1.0 game. They are burning through money to fast, there is too much content left to build and they haven't even really started debugging it beyond small QoL updates. But go ahead, keep thinking it's just around the corner.
I wonder how people ignore what is going on PTU wave 1 right now )) It is for a week already CIG makes a subpatch every day or two with new characteristics of weapons and characteristics of ships related to fighting. Every day or two they change hitpoints, damage, damage type, ship speed, projectile speed, firerate, firing mechanics like overcharge and so on, sometimes changes are opposite. It looks like they have no clear plan of changes and are very preoccupied trying to figure out these numbers from PTU statistics.
BG is the anti Mike. I love him but I come here for the grounded takes. Cause maybe SQ42 version 1.0 is soon, but fucking SC 1.0 is not coming anytime soon. If it does I'll sign up for a membership on his channel.
And also, i hate when People say, its been in development since 2012 bla bla. The game hasent been in real development, like with enough People and work that make sense, before 2018, so the game actually only have 6 years on it. So atleast and minimum 4 more years until some what done and 1.0 probably have to rush it in 4 years because of investors, but they could probably use 6 years in reality.
Even with the new patch on the EPTU today.. The game is still unplayable. But CIGs ability to look over numerous flaws. Then act like they have done something miraculous is displayed time after time.
I disagree with Mikes take on things like personal transport (as one example) not being needed for 1.0. I believe base level of minimal gameplay for each ship/profession needs to be there. If you were a player that only bought the Starliner, then you shouldn’t be left behind at 1.0 because CIG put more priority on someone else’s career path over yours.
I honestly see it turning out like EVE. There’s plenty of solo gameplay etc but the real end game stuff, etc will be org based. Including org owned/run planets/systems eventually
Let's be honest and look at 3.23, a patch that uses a lot of stuff from the past years of Sq42 development still can't be released in a bug free state in time. How are they supposed to deliver on all the other missing systems and get the quantity required for a 1.0 release in only a few years? I don't believe CIG is capable of releasing SC in the next 3 years.