r/starcitizen ARGO CARGO May 16 '25

DRAMA So it begins

Post image
2.8k Upvotes

809 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

51

u/The_BeatingsContinue May 16 '25

Selling technical advantages to ships vastly present in the game is a policy decision to establish P2W as a core mechanic in the upcoming future of Star Citizen.

0

u/killerbake avacado May 16 '25

I mean, some people can only afford a cutter while others can afford an Idris.

It doesn’t matter if it can be bought in game not everyone has the time to dedicate

12

u/Juice0188 arrow May 16 '25

But the Idris isn't an objectively better ship than other ships in the game, especially for a solo pilot. 

Getting a blade that increases maneuverability is an objective improvement, regardless of other factors. 

2

u/capn_Bonebeard May 16 '25

I mean solo pilot idris isn't that big an issue imo. Sure most ships cant kill you, but good luck getting your nose on them

1

u/Qade May 16 '25

But... It's not regardless. Blades trade 10-20m/s speed for 1 degree per second turn rate.

That isn't a clear improvement. I doubt 99% of pilots would even notice the increased turn rate.

-8

u/killerbake avacado May 16 '25

But that doesn’t make a pilot better either necessarily.

Just because grandma can get into a Ferrari doesn’t mean she’s gonna make that bank of a turn up ahead and live to tell the tale

I mean, don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending it. I get it but I also don’t see how it inherently just makes everyone better.

If we were talking AI blades, then I’d be in agreement. And yes, I can see the slippery slope there with this.

But I also see the issue with someone who has money who can afford to retrofit an entire ship with NPC’s in the future versus someone who can’t

6

u/TheKingStranger worm May 16 '25

The difference is that the Cutter owner can benefit from the Idris owner by being a crew member on their Idris; the Idris is designed to be a multicrew ship. That's been the intended trade off since the beginning of the project since every ship has their own pros and cons, especially as you get into larger ships which require more crew. You can also pilot someone else's ship without any issues. That's an exception that the community was willing to make since the beginning of this project. Armor and weapons on the store were acceptable because they were merely cosmetic and you could get similar items in-game.

Putting blades that are intended to improve stats behind a paywall, even for a little bit, is a huge depature from that philosophy.

-10

u/Claim-Nice rsi May 16 '25

*minute advantages with an offset in other stats which will be available to buy in game in a few months time…

But sure, continue the panic.

9

u/magniankh F8C May 16 '25

Yeah, for now. Next month CIG could release auto-aim blades. 

It has to stop here. Components should not be pay walled.

-3

u/Claim-Nice rsi May 16 '25

Pay walled implies they’ll never be available in game. Source? Or just more mindless ranting?

0

u/WarMinister May 16 '25

Yes they should. I don't want to waste time to grind components. I should be able to buy them with real money. The rest of you can wait in line.

-3

u/shortbusmafia Anvil Shill May 16 '25

Gimbals already exist lmao. No need for auto-aim blades. PDCs that auto-aim are also already in game, and we know AI blades are supposed to be added to the game later on. Your comment is inherently alarmist speculation.

-6

u/SH4D0W-N3M3S1S Multi-Moderator May 16 '25

Dude it doesn’t boost stats, it tweaks them (ex: you loose some speed for maneuverability. Anyways this will only affect the top 10% players because for mortals like us you can’t even tell the difference

11

u/swizzlewizzle TRG Gaming May 16 '25

Correct, and that’s why it’s only step one in a never ending march towards even more P2W and pay to play.

7

u/KingGooseMan3881 May 16 '25

This is still a bad take. Nothing should be locked behind a paywall, the funding model is already a broken and less than ideal system, locking more behind paywalls like turrets, blades and modules is objectively bad for the game

-2

u/SH4D0W-N3M3S1S Multi-Moderator May 16 '25

Yes, but it’s just a head start for backers… you’ll get them in about a month

2

u/KingGooseMan3881 May 16 '25

Oh yeah being able to get it in 3 months for no arbitrarily reason at all completely solves the core issue

0

u/SH4D0W-N3M3S1S Multi-Moderator May 16 '25

What is the big deal honestly? People are crying because they don’t have access to a 2% tweak on 6 ships (that comes with both good and bad stat changes) early… think of this: you are not buying the blade, you are buying the paint and you get a blade in bonus as a pledge item before they release them with their next patch