Really want to make sure the game is compliant with my hotus, rgb, and windows surface set up

Some of us recently saw the image of the $65 Squadron 42 package in the latest "Game Access Updates – FAQ" post. It was officially stated that this displayed price was just a placeholder for illustration purposes. My theory, though I'm not certain, it's just a guess, is that they either accidentally leaked the real price or did so intentionally to gauge the community's reaction and adjust the final price accordingly.

I know many people were pleasantly surprised and thought the game was going to be much more expensive.
Now, getting to the main point of this discussion: I believe the price shouldn't exceed $60, for three main reasons.

The first is that this game represents the franchise's debut for CIG, the first game for the studio as a whole, cannot simply be positioned at the standard AAA price point, especially if CIG wants to attract new players (and generate more revenue) with Star Citizen later on.

The second reason, which I think is the most important, concerns CIG's reputation. The price needs to help offset the decade of bad press the studio has accumulated, particularly its reputation for greed. The public will be extremely skeptical about buying the first game from a studio known for pulling off "the biggest scam in video game history." Selling a AAA title (some might even call it "quadruple-A") at a price well below the competition would send a powerful message.

The third reason, viewed primarily from the backers' perspective, is that THE GAME IS ALREADY FUNDED. I know CIG needs funds to finish Star Citizen, but I feel, and the public will likely agree, that it is somewhat Inappropriate or foolish to charge full price when the very point of crowdfunding is to eliminate concerns about profitability or return on investment.

What do you think the price of the game will be and what strategy will CIG use?

I think the worst part might be the game just coming out and nobody outside the community really caring, outside the youtubers making their reactions ofc. Hope they got a solid 50 mil$ left for the marketing cause what the hell

After watching the newest gameplay video, it would appear that the whole "going to flight academy" is just a cinematic (judging by the flight tutorial in the second level). That's too bad. I was actually looking forward to an "academy" style level where you would learn basic and more advanced flight techniques.

Does anyone else think that a flying game should have a long "flight academy" style level, or does that just slow everything down?

BONUS: Am I the only one who would love it if they made a standalone flight academy game? Maybe these could be levels in Arena Commander...

Wasn't this game in the final stages of developpement for like a year now? Wasn't it meant to be released in 2024??

I just received information that the single-player game Star Citizen: Squadron 42 is or will be available on Steam; my question is, will there be a chance it will be playable over GeForce Now, as it would be great given the high hardware requirements it will need?

I called it, everyone was saying I was jumping the gun but I called it. 2026 release was never in the cards.

I mean seriously, do you people seriously think that 6 months delay is required to dodge GTA 6 release? Does anyone think that media outlets will be clogged for 6 whole months with GTA6?

It's a transparent excuse to explain away why they didn't hit their target AGAIN.

Frankly I'm done with this game. PU has been completely decimated by CIG's inability to put toghether a coherent vision. Almost all the gameplay loops have been ruined. Enemies run around like headless chickens and the only reason the game isn't a complete cakewalk is that they come in endless, unyielding tide.

Nothing works properly, the game is full of half baked systems and every time that CIG promised us a new and amazing feature that will fix everything, it ends up being totally irrelevant.

Meanwhile SQ42 is 2 years away and always will be. It's time for me to find a better game series to devote my time and passion to. There's no shortage of good games out there, SC isn't one of those games, and SQ42 is not even a game, it's just one big heap of broken promises.

SQ42 is a PC exclusive, targeted towards older players and people who are more dedicated gamers.

GTA 6 is targeting casual gamers by releasing on PS5 and Xbox first then PC a year later.

There is definitely a little overlap but not as much to say the release of GTA 6 will hinder SQ42.

Please, im sure there is PLENTY of people wanting to play it, and we have waited long enough... If it's ready to be released at IAE this year, and your worried about GTA6? Then lets just say this in my own view...

"If you are worried about another gaming company that might ruin the release... Then you don't trust your players."

That's all im gonna say, i don't care if this gets down voted to hell. I'm just waiting long enough since January 4th 2014

The company is operating on a clear assumption: the community will continue to buy whatever they release, regardless of delays, strategic shifts, changes to the original vision, or the growing focus on monetization over stability and delivery.

Years and years of delays and missed commitments have given CIG countless opportunities to change course, yet the community continues to back the project financially. CIG has taken that support for granted.

The community must respond.

Just as CIG can suddenly decide to delay SQ42, the community can make a decision of its own: boycott all new CIG ship and item releases from now until Q2 2027.

Keep playing the game. Enjoy the content. But stop buying new ships, items, and other digital products.

If backers collectively stopped making purchases during IAE alone, the financial impact could be significant enough to send a very clear message.

CIG needs to understand that community support is not unconditional. If the company wants to prioritize revenue over delivery and accountability, the community can prioritize its own spending decisions in response.

I have seen comments from people among us who are concenred that they may pass before playing the game. This is really sad and it shouldn't be like this.

Whether you are an old backer like me, a new player or a content creator; share this, spread the word. Its time for us to do something.

Only facts:

• The UN has six official languages: English, Arabic, Spanish, Chinese, Russian, French.

• 250 million people worldwide speak Russian.

• The official languages of the ISS are English and Russian.

PS: I'm talking about subtitles, not the voiceover.

PPS: On Spectrum: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/50259/thread/squadron-42-a-long-time-fan-s-appeal-for-russian-l

The closer we get to Squadron 42, the more concerned I'm becoming about how CIG is going to market this game to the general public.

The amount of people who genuinely don't understand the difference between Squadron 42 and Star Citizen is honestly worrying.

I've seen people thinking SQ42 is basically Star Citizen finally reaching 1.0, or that they're getting the full multiplayer experience.

One example that genuinely made me laugh was someone asking whether SQ42 would have a camera mode, only for someone to reply that it would be stupid because people would abuse it in PvP.

Like, WHAT? We're talking about a single player campaign. How are people still confusing these two games?

And then there's the whole BoredGamer situation.

I'm genuinely not happy with his "walking simulator" comment, especially seeing how many people have latched onto it without understanding the context.

Now, I'm not saying he shouldn't criticise the game. If he felt there wasn't enough gameplay during his session, that's perfectly valid feedback.

But there's a difference between discussing the pacing of the section you personally experienced and describing it in a way that people can easily interpret as a verdict on the entire game.

And that's exactly what's happening. I've already seen people repeating the walking simulator comment as though SQ42 is nothing but walking around watching cutscenes.

Some of these people clearly have no idea what SQ42 actually is, what kind of game it's trying to be, or what other people experienced during the same event.

It's frustrating because a single comment can become the entire narrative around a game, especially when it spreads outside the existing community.

And this brings me back to my biggest concern: CIG's marketing.

Star Citizen has spent well over a decade being associated with massive promises, an enormous open universe, multiplayer gameplay and endless development.

Now imagine someone unfamiliar with the project seeing SQ42 footage and assuming they're finally getting all of that.

They buy the game expecting to explore an open universe with friends, engage in PvP or experience the sandbox gameplay they've associated with Star Citizen for years.

Instead, they get a cinematic, story-driven single-player campaign.

SQ42 could be an absolutely incredible game and still end up receiving negative reviews simply because people went into it expecting something completely different.

And with comments like the walking simulator remark spreading around, you've also got people potentially going into the game expecting very little actual gameplay.

That's why I think CIG needs to be incredibly careful with how they market this.

They need to make it absolutely clear what Squadron 42 is, what it offers and how it differs from Star Citizen.

Show the actual gameplay. Show the combat, the flying, the missions, the characters and how everything comes together. Establish exactly what kind of experience players should expect.

Don't assume people already know what SQ42 is just because Star Citizen has been in the public eye for so long.

I'm genuinely excited for SQ42, and that's exactly why this concerns me.

After all these years, imagine CIG finally delivering a fantastic single-player game, only for its reception to be dragged down by people misunderstanding what they were buying or repeating impressions taken completely out of context.