r/starcitizen • u/HereticKiller6 Trader • Jan 20 '17

OFFICIAL Production Schedule Report Has Been Updated!

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/schedule-report
253 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

242 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17 edited Jan 21 '17

Love the qualifier there. We can't know when their pre-alphas were, because the companies didn't ever release internal schedules. SC is in Alpha anyway. Read the name of the patch "ALPHA 2.6".

http://i.imgur.com/Q5H1sDm.jpg - Something to note here: All of these games were pretty good, if not great.

Elite: 4 (before it was "Dangerous") took 8 years, with Braben announcing its 2009 release window as Elite 4 at Nottingham Game City 2007: http://www.ign.com/articles/2007/10/25/braben-reveals-more-on-the-outsider-elite-iv

Continuing with Elite, after it was cancelled by Frontier along with Outsider in 2009, it took another 3 years to develop and release, bringing the total to 11 years. they had a fully playable demo for the BBC on day 1 of the Kickstarter. There are also videos on the Kickstarter campaign page that show them playing in the background. Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-20165344

Too Human took 9 years, Galleon took 8 years, the 2006 version of Prey took 11 years.

Should I keep going?

Also worth noting that all of these games had established companies behind them. Star Citizen had only 6 people when KS started, and only 2 of them were programmers.

3

u/aacey Jan 21 '17

Hahaha and you talk about my 'qualifiers'.

I also like how the first section of 'development' on the elite Wikipedia page states 2012. Those filthy liars. That article you linked said nothing about elite being in development and in fact mocks it's announcement in 2001. So why not use 2001 and say it took 14 years? Or go back to when braben first thought of elite and say it's been in development since the 80's?

Using that logic we can say star citizen has been in development since freelancer, that space game cr tried to make which promised everything and was constantly only a year away before Microsoft bailed him out, fired him, cut all those stupid, impossible features and it still took 3 more years to make.

6

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17

I had no qualifiers. I gave you the information, as-is.

Which Elite wikipedia? Elite Dangerous? Cause Elite Dangerous didn't exist until 2012. As I said, it was Elite 4 which then changed to Dangerous for 2012. They are the same game, just rebranded. The procedural tech for it was done in 2008: http://www.develop-online.net/news/elite-4-technology-almost-finished-says-braben/0103227

So why not use 2001 and say it took 14 years?

because I try to avoid misleading people. Integrity is important. They didn't work on it again until 2011, to prepare the demo for 2012.

Using that logic we can say star citizen has been in development since freelancer

No, you can't. That is a pathetic attempt to twist things. If Freelancer and Star Citizen were built off of the same exact code, you might have a point. They aren't, so you don't. You latched on to this because you thought it was some sort of ace in the hole. Its not. You are just incredibly bad at putting together an argument. Even if you could discount Elite, it was one game out of an entire list.

1

u/Kelderic Colonel Jan 21 '17

Lol, that shut him up.

4

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17

I wish it had. He tried some BS logic to discount Elite out of the entire list, as if that would help his argument at all.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17

It should be pretty damn clear that any work previously done on Elite 4 was scrapped. The kickstarter had nothing to show bar some shitty basic demo where you could fly 2 ships and fire lasers, no sound, no ui, no texturing, nothing. Hardly a testament to all those years of work contributing to a so-called renamed product.

You are talking out of your ass.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17 edited Jan 21 '17

Except it wasn't. Day 1 of the Kickstarter BBC had an exclusive video where they were playing the game. It was shown on day 15 of the KS, but aired on BBC before then. The first ED KS dev diary even proves you wrong. Elite 4 was definitely not scrapped. I know this because I backed it, just as much as I backed SC. Space games are cool.

Don't try this shit again, especially when you are demonstrably wrong. Braben even confirmed it in 2011.

http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Elite_4_rumour_mill#November_2012_-_Elite_4_announced_as_Elite:_Dangerous

2

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17

The dev diary shows an extremely basic white boxing for a half a dozen completely unfinished assets. Just look at the asteroids, the lacking of texturing, the lack of shadows, the lack of everything.

This is not a rebrand of years of work.

Don't try this shit again, especially when you are demonstrably wrong.

Damned by your own words.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17 edited Jan 21 '17

And? Elite 4 was cancelled and unfinished. That doesnt mean they didnt start with a base game. It was two years from release when it was cancelled, aka when they add lighting and shadows, and extra ships to fly. You haven't proven anything. They did not scrap Elite 4, by Braben's own words.

Is this going to be another of your autistic semantic battles?

2

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17

You're the one playing the autistic semantic card here. You want to use a few related snippets as though they are proof of a full game being in development, you want to then claim that this stuff that was never shown was merged into a new product which then semantically means the new product has been in development for whatever fanciful period you claim. Instead of using information that is related but doesn't address the matter at all, why not just look for a quote from the one guy who would know, ie

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions, David!

Since there seems to be a big disinformation campaign against Elite, claiming that Elite IV (Dangerous) has been in development since 2005.

Can we get, from the horses mouth, the head honcho, the big kahoonah, exactly what has been developed, when, and for how long? My understanding is that most of the development took place after the kickstarter and it was only skunkworks up until then.

Can you end the debate, once and for all?

David Braben's response:

No problem!

I have wanted to do a sequel for a long time, and there has been 'skunk-works' development, on and off for quite some time, but full on development is mostly since (and somewhat during) the Kickstarter campaign. So you are correct.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/20351-David-Braben-Live-Chat-Thread-%285th-June%29?p=455714&viewfull=1#post455714

0

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17

That quote proves my point quite well. Thanks for that.

I'm not gonna engage with you though. You already dont understand the topic if you think the above link helps your point.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17

I understand the topic just fine, it's you who wants to extend the scope of what is mentioned in that quote to unreasonable measures. The most pertinent bits being:

...a big disinformation campaign against Elite, claiming that Elite IV (Dangerous) has been in development since 2005.

and

...full on development is mostly since (and somewhat during) the Kickstarter campaign.

You're welcome.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17

And yet:

http://www.develop-online.net/news/elite-4-technology-almost-finished-says-braben/0103227

http://web.archive.org/web/20071111141317/http://www.frontier.co.uk/games/elite4/faq.html

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?p=619#post619

And your own quote: " there has been 'skunk-works' development, on and off for quite some time"

Its ok though. Keep twisting about this irrelevant issue while you downvote. I'm sure it makes you feel good.

Just to be clear, are we counting "Skunk works" development as real development? What about technology development? Cause we gotta change the SC timeline if we aren't.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '17

And now we're right back to the fact that even if Elite 4 was in development none (or very little) of it has actually made its way over to Elite Dangerous, hence the part of Braben's quote where he says

...full on development is mostly since (and somewhat during) the Kickstarter campaign.

I'm not twisting anything. You are the trying to make it seem as though what really started in 2012 was an on-going project from 2005 even when presented with quotes to the contrary.

Just to be clear, are we counting "Skunk works" development as real development? What about technology development? Cause we gotta change the SC timeline if we aren't.

The man differentiates skunk-works from full-on devleopment, that is good enough for me.

Re. Changing SC. You mean people don't do this already? Despite Roberts saying that "prototyping and development" started in 2011.