Just fyi, this wasn't a "show off" thing, as in tech demo nor trailer. Go to the Day 2 broadcast near the end. They have someone actively play the prologue. During the stream it crashed twice, then at the very end there's a bug where the PC is supposed to give their gun to another character, instead of handing the gun over, she glitches out the player keeps the gun, and she teleports back a bit and sits there pretending to hold the gun. After they finish it you can literally hear a frustrated dev off screen shout "it's something with that machine!" The dev says that apparently the day before they played the prologue 3-4 times to make sure it was ok. That's where this showcase comes from, the dev got upset enough to re-record the playthrough and post it separately from the Citcon stream itself.
That frustrated dev was Chris Roberts. The chairman of CIG. He said he and QA had been playing it constantly without issue for quite some time. He wanted to demonstrate the gameplay without issue. Of course he was frustrated.
Friendly reminder, when Starfield reached its ‘complete’ state, then it had almost 1.5 years of extra polish (courtesy of Uncle Phil). We're talking about a far less ambitious game than Squadron 42. Sometimes one underestimates the complexity of developing a game. Just because its content and mechanics are complete, does not mean that the ‘product’ is complete.
Tbh that looks already better than what the big Halo, CoD and Bugglefield slobbed out. The acting looks great, love all the actors they have. I'm excited for the story and also excited for the Persistent Universe. I just hope I'll still be alive when it releases.
WW1 coined term dogfight. 2 women fighting was commonly called a catfight; all pilots were men, hence pilots fighting was referred to as a dogfight. Also fighters have forward facing guns, which means the favored firing position is behind an opponent where he cannot fight back. Two dogs chasing each others tails, dogfight.
Feature complete, just means all the game systems and mechanics are in, it technically doesnt mean all the levels are completed, or models and visuals etc. So yeah, feature complete, not content complete.
"No other studios have these problems"..... Hmmm, Cyberpunk 2077? Did it not take three years AFTER its release to get to properly polished state? I would rather CIG use those three years to get it to a properly polished state BEFORE it releases.
CD projekt has released completed games previously. I don't think CIG knows when a game is complete, Thats why it will never release. The guy in charge needs a publisher to tell him "No! The Spaceship Engine does not need a working Oil Temperature gauge to launch!" Hes 100% a perfectionist, but even Hideo Kojima had money men to stop him from going crazy.
@@kellywilson137 "CD projekt has released completed games previously" That makes the shit show that was the Cyberpunk 2077 release WORSE.. You know why that's worse right?
@@kellywilson137 chris roberts has release a million complete games before founding CIG and at least 3 movies, (I recommend you "outlander" movie, it's brilliant), also erin roberts and his team work on the company that release all the lego star wars games back in the day, not to count guys like sean tracy that release the crysis games, or the blond guy from germany brian somoething I think ... also tony zurovic release a lot of games in the origin days, you are talking about industry veterans with a million won battles in their backs. They made ultima online dude... you must be young but that's basically the father of all MMOs. The wing commander series, freelancer etc etc ... have you seen the trailer of the game ... just watch the entire hour from the star citizen you tube channel, and judge that. He doesn't need anything, he has the freedom to do a great game thanks to us the backers, this is why we back to get the money men from the devs backs so they can actually do a great game.
I don't get why people harp on about the $700mil number, its really not that big a number when you look at what thats gone towards, its producing 2 games, Squadron 42 (single player), and Star Citizen (MMO), all the while building a company from roughly 12 people to 1000+ spread out over 4 studios, that includes all the equipment, software and real estate needed to set those studios up, and paying all those salaries, like if they paid every employee $50k, thats $50mil a year just in salaries. They started with basically nothing, they werent an established studio like Rockstar and then just outlayed $700mil to make the games, Rockstar just outlays $2 billion for a single game from an established studio 🤷♂️
The other thing is the community voted twice to increase the scale of the game or stick with the current plan at that time. There are many things to criticize about CIG especally timelines but never the scale and ambition because the community asked/voted for it.
and they made an engine with crazy tech that nobody has, from a very old version of cryengine... so a gigantic 4 studio company a crazy engine an mmo with ridiculous ambition, an a crazy blockbuster single player with actual A list actors like we never seen before... so how much money did gta online, the rage engine, the rockstar company and red dead redemption 2 cost ??? that's when you realize they have been doing all this stuff for cheap actually. With this said, I don't like the way they monetize the mmo, but if people want to help the devs giving them money is their choice at the end I'm okay with that even if I wouldn't give them more than the 50 bucks I pledge back in the day.
Rockstar is making an mmo and single player version of GTA6. It’s so disingenuous when people claim CIG is making two games but Rockstar is making one. They also released RDR2 and RDR online in the same timeframe. I want SC to be good too but let’s not kid ourselves that their development budget or time is normal. Rockstar also didn’t fund GTA6 by selling in game assets that are still undelivered after 10 years.
I remember being excited for this when it was announced around when I was in college. I didn't have money to support it back then so I didn't. By the time I did have money many years had passed; so I just decided to give it a try once the single player comes out. I still hold that position and wish them the best.
they made an engine with crazy tech that nobody has, from a very old version of cryengine... so a gigantic 4 studio company a crazy engine an mmo with ridiculous ambition, an a crazy blockbuster single player with actual A list actors like we never seen before... so how much money did gta online, the rage engine, the rockstar company and red dead redemption 2 cost ??? that's when you realize they have been doing all this stuff for cheap actually. With this said, I don't like the way they monetize the mmo, but if people want to help the devs giving them money is their choice at the end I'm okay with that even if I wouldn't give them more than the 50 bucks I pledge back in the day. And all this is all funded by the players themselves with the exception of one investor that didn't bother them at all... instead of those greedy publishers that would make them release a bullshit game... this is actually the perfect situation where they are ... people are too dumb to understand though.
and I don't think people get it, the game is already made, already fully paid for, there is literally zero risk ! all the money they get in 2026 is gonna be pure winnings almost exclusively... let's say they tank reaaally bad so they sell 1 million copies ... that's 60 million dollars that's what they get from an entire year of star citizen selling ships ... so 60 million on top of their common winnings in the worst of cases ... now think about it, if they sell like wukong that would be the best case... that's a ridiculous amount of money they will get and is all pure winnings ... and I'm pretty sure they will sell at least 6 million copies that's 360 millions of winnings ... if they let me I will invest in this company to be honest. Also they talk about a console version at some point... that's even more money... oh trust me they will make a TON of money.
I think the real moneymaker CI are gunning for is their Star Engine. Can you imagine the licensing opportunities for an engine that let's you build out a game at that level of fidelity and scope but with the Star Wars, Star Trek or Warhammer 40k IP? I think there's big money there. Anyway, I'm a backer and while I'm disappointed with the 2026 release for S42, it's not that big of a deal to me at this point. To be into SC, you have to learn how to enjoy the ride or you'll never survive the journey. I've already had over a decade of enjoyment with this game - once you go through the highs and lows, it's just all part of it. I... I don't know what I'll do with myself if it actually releases and there's no more daily development updates to follow on YT, etc. It's just become this constant thing that I've been watching and playing with over the years. And if it fails and it was all a waste of time and money? Pft, whatever - look at us... we're sitting around, talking video games here; we're all wasting our time when we could be out making money (well, not you Luke, well done ; ) Looking forward with your Space Tomato talk o7
That's really the point a lot people seem to miss. Yes it's been over a decade but no other released game has reached such a scale. If they just don't want games that have such scope then that's their subjective opinion.
@@SnowTerebi Games should deliver within our lifetimes especially a Crowdfunded title. TotalBiscuit was alive when this game was getting crowdfunded, look what happened to him.
You would care if you had been 48 when you backed a game that had an estimated dev time of two years and now are over 60 realizing that you will not forever be able to play games because, you know - bodies age....
@@intothevoid2046there’s nothing else even close to this game anywhere else or even within range of competition. It’s really your own fault if you thought that what they envisioned could be delivered in 2 years. Just be happy it’s still alive. There will never be another game like it. Certainly not by any triple A Studio.
Feature complete doesn't mean it's done. It means the game has all the features in place to BE complete. It does not mean it's all implemented and put together and it certainly doesn't mean there's no bugs or polish. Bug fixing, testing and polishing takes TIME. A LOT of time.
@@z4rk979 indeed, but him making this Video before the talk or without watching any of the presentations as you can see by him calling the SQ42 Prologue a tech demo is a joke
I don't know if you understand how far away 1.0 actually still is and how much will change until then. Yes, you can ignore safely that panel completely.
@@intothevoid2046 Yea, that is like 5 years away and you can't count on it, but the main point of the panel was the intentions of the future. What is the game they want to make? What does a 1.0 look like? What do they want the verse to look like? Until now, they have just randomly put in incomplete features without telling people how that feature will fit and whether or not the game is worth their time to follow.
They said "Feature Complete" not "Content Complete". Feature complete would mean all tech and systems are in place, now "polishing phase" may have been a bit of an overstatement but yeah
A few points for clarification. When they said last year, that they are feature complete, the did not mean that the game was a year or so out, what they meant was that on a technical level the game was done, and more or less playable. Give that the game is supposed to be about 30hrs long, and we only really only saw this 1hr or so, we have no idea how long it will take them to bring the rest of the game to the level of this tutorial section. When it comes to the claim of pay to win, they did announce this past weekend, that all the best of everything would only come from crafting, so if a person bought a ship with real money, and a player built that ship from crafting, that crafted ship should be better in some way, I assume from a swappable component aspect. This version of the playthrough video could have absolutely been pre-rendered, as many game engines have the ability to record play session game data in editor, and then render them later with all the best setting possible.
did you jusst make a video with the information you toke from watching 20secs and than skipping several minutes over and over again? a tech demo of the game? that wwas the entire prologue of the game, the tutorial. i dont think yuo should mmake this kind of videoos without the full information. not trying to hate, but very reminiscing of main stream media of nowadays ( not in a good way ).
That's not true, even though I understand why it might seem that way. The overwhelming majority of players only buy a starter package. Of the players that buy more ships, most of them only buy one or two. Then a small percentage of those buy a shitload of ships. But those ships will only be tier 1 (out of 5) and they don't come with upgrades components. People who only spend money will be at a disadvantage to people who actually play the game and can get additional components and upgrades. Also, buying a ship doesn't mean you win a fight, and it doesn't mean you win the economics of repairing, fueling, fitting out, and operating a ship in game. It's not a game where you can just buy a bigger ship and win against everyone. Anybody who's played Eve can tell you about how buying credits doesn't win you the game. You have to survive over time.
What people don´t understand well, this game is taking 10 years, but is a game basically, "totally" found by players. anyone that study little bit of the industry knows that game dev for AAA games is getting hugely more expensive since 2012 until now..
Because in pu servers are overloaded simulating the entire stanton system. Which server meshing is intended to fix. This single player game doesn't have to simulate that much load and the NPCs are working as intended.
They never said "We are content complete on SQ42". They have said "We are feature complete on SQ42". - Wich is a big difference ... ... but yes - CIG and timelines: i woun't believe them but better settle my self down and wait until it comes in ...
2024 was never a release date. nor 2020, 2018 was a release date but they actually completely change the scope of the game, and they never gave a release date again until now. Also the game wasn't ready or complete in 2023 they clearly stated "feature complete" and they specify they weren't on an alpha state meaning the game wasn't finish but only the pieces of the puzzle in place.
People began to play when there wasn't planets in and characters almost couldn't walk, but ships could fly around without physics involved. They have created lot of tech in these years, the procedural full size solar system and the travelway between solar systems and the server tech required to run all that stuff.
I'm fine with a year and half to 2 years or 3 or 4 or whatever, as long as it's good. I paid a million years ago. I counted it as lost a year after I gave it when I saw the stretch goals blow up. But I've never once thought it was a scam, it's just a mess. But the intro they showed was awesome. If they release something good enough I want to play it I'm happy regardless of how long it took. There's been a ton of crappier games I've spent money on.
It was not "content complete" last year it was "feature complete" that means all the base tech needed to complete the game was done now its just world building and polish. Some of the people in the live chat man I really hope they get to eat their words when it releases. (CIG please dont make me look stupid in 2 years lol)
Lol ignore the haters. You'd think they'd eat their words, but they'll just find something else to complain about. If SC walks on water, they'll say it's because it can't swim
14:35 if humans get to be in space one day, for sure we will have new type of glass, because Saphire glass is more brittle than normal glass. It's very resilient to scratches, but will break faster upon getting hit.
all i know is Day 2 was incredible and the fact 4.0 and Pyro are coming this year and then next year we are getting base building and space station building is going to change the game forever. On top of that we are finally getting crafting and player driven economy in the next year or so. No longer will ships bought on the pledge store be PTW.. A ship acquired in-game and upgraded to tier 5 IN GAME is better in every way than a base tier 1 ship on the store. I think that is a good balance.
This isn't just 1 ambitious project. This is 2 ambitious projects being built from literal scratch. They even rebuilt the current engine to support the games they're creating. There are games with 5-6 year dev times that are funded by big gaming corps with a fraction of the scope that SC has, and a fraction of the budget. I think SC is over $750m raised in the past 12, almost 13 years. To me and a lot of other people, that's fair. Is it exhausting? Absolutely. However, when they announced SQ42 was feature complete, and in polishing phase, and then we got the insane amount of technological and feature implementation in this year since they said that, I'm ok. Ship backlog is getting finished, with new surprises as well, we're likely getting 4.0 pushed to at least Wave 1 by end of the year, and that's a whole gameplay overhaul and new system. IDK, those that only pay attention to the articles get a twisted vision of what CIG is doing, and it sucks because if people actually took the time to try the game, they could make a way better decision on whether it's a scam to them or not.
my criticism is simple; I backed this game on specific promises made more than 10 years ago, and what was promised then still hasn't been delivered after hundreds of millions of $
@@gawkthimm6030 so your criticism is that they shouldn't take time to deliver the best they can? Even though you can play as they build unlike GTA 6 fans?
Alright I get wanting to criticize CIG, but it's crazy work to call this a "deep dive" and then cover the squadron 42 demo, a tiny bit of the Genesis system (which was much more impressive than just weather tech) and then the sandworm content while completely ignoring the crafting, building, and progression plans they showed off that got everyone so hyped. Cmon man.
The problem is that we can no longer trust CIG. It's been too long, and this "polishing" phase is now taking 3 years. That's a long time for polishing. Meanwhile it crashes multiple times on stage and they have a top of the line computer. Most people don't have a top of the line computer. This is going to be worse than Starfield in terms of performance. So now we have to wait 2 more years, at least. I'm 63 now, and there's a real risk I could be dead before it comes available, if it ever does. I've been waiting 8 years now, and I bought in because Chris Roberts made it seem like it was just about to be released back then.
Polishing is not about performance. Optimizing is the phase to improve performance. Polishing is used to review the levels and cutscenes and do minor tweaks.
Yes it's been 12 years but they're making SQ42 the single player game AND star citizen the MMO. So it's not like they can fully devote all their resources to SQ42. I don't think the timeline is too crazy if you look at the fact they're trying to juggle a triple A single player game and an always on live (although buggy) MMO.
The timeline doesn't make sense for the SQ42 game, but if you want the game to ship around the same time as 1.0, well, then it makes sense. If I were CIG I would want those SQ42 customers to hop over to the Persistent universe right after having played the SQ42 game, while the iron is hot.
FYI: SQ42 was pitched as a 30 something singleplayer mission "disk" inside Starcitizen. As a game mode - you can look it up on the kickstarter page. It was not pitched as a 3 part triple A title which it is now. I never backed for a standalone single player game when I backed in 2012. I hold a golden ticket, which means I backed before it was even officially announced. I hope SQ42 was worth all the money they dumped into it, even from backers that never bought it. But I doubt it will be.... And with the state the PU is in, talking about a 1.0 release is more than bold. As someone who backed for a game that should have com out 7 or 8 years ago I have no confidence whatsoever in what anyone of the higher ups at CIG say. Keeping the hope up has become a business model at this point. Also it Bethesda had taken their time to build an engine that could do seamless transitions it also wouldn't have released yet. CIG are building system for 12 years now. It's about time they start developing a game.
Agreed and I'm also one of those 2012 backers. I thought when it was first announced it was only the sandbox world and not also a single player. Some other backers I've spoken to, that backed years after me, said they backed for the standalone game. After what we've been shown, over and over again, I'm thinking it will be more of an interactive movie instead of a game.
Also, you gotta see those Golgot100 vids on everything star citizen. He has one on the employee turnover and it's surprising...or not surprising at all.
You completely missed or overlooked the fact that they outlined the 1.0 vision of the game, including the game loops in detail. This is a big deal. It changes it from being just a space ship sim to an actual game and an mmo. Lazy of you to not look over the presentations before hand.
the 1.0 vision that even spectrum users are rebelling against lol. They have them arguing about meaningless what if scenarios but they will soon disregard those red herrings. its called the reckoning. IT BECKONS
They can't stop selling ships, they dug their own grave of sorts with that (not really because it's allowing them to continue development). Their whole funding model relies on selling ships so they won't stop, I don't think. They did say during citizencon that all items will have quality tiers including ships, and store bought ships will be of the lowest tier, so the good stuff will still require crafting in game, but that's as much as they'll do to avoid being too much pay to win.
Until Squadron 42 comes out... may be priced above the standard price of AAA, which is most likely going to be $80 for the time. Edit: Plus if they license out star engine
Technically the most expensive ship it's not a win. A solo player can't manage that, so the ship becomes a collectible. Ships won't offer any advantage towards the endgame. Only large Orgs/Guilds will win because of the numbers of their player base.
I thought it was interesting in 2023 when they stated 42 was feature complete and needed polish, then showed all the teams that were doing the "polish". When they went from team to team, it showed them creating like whole environments and set pieces still. Also, how much of 42 is going to be cinematic? It's stacking up to be an interactive movie in my estimation, which really makes me wonder what's taking so long.
Like those large ship battles with all those pieces and debris falling off and all persist through the entire playthrough, they need to build a lot of tech to support live cutscenes like that instead of having them pre-rendered and just played as a video. And when the game seamlessly transition between cutscene and active gameplay, all the stuff happened in cutscene will persist through and affect the gameplay moments as well. There's also things like planetary entry without loading screen so during the campaign you can fly your fighter right off your corvette and down to the planet, all in one go without interruptions. They wanna build as immersive of an experience as they can.
That's because feature complete means the game mechanics and systems, so like the locomotion of zero G, ship flight and combat mechanics etc, it doesn't mean all the visuals, set pieces, possibly even levels are complete. So yeah, feature complete, not content complete
@@Keil2590 no, you need it feature complete first, you don't do content like levels or final art until you have the features like movement and traversal or dynamic destruction finished. So now that they are feature complete, that can move to polishing and being content complete.
What is the budget for the game? Hamill, Oldman, Gillian Anderson and Morgan Freeman alone already cost a combine 100 million at least so where is the rest of the cost😅
they can make all the motion capture in like a week for the big characters or even less I don't think they pay them 100 million ... but they have a ton of A list actors in the game. So they spent a good chunk.
It's so funny looking at Gillian Anderson and Gary Oldman frozen in time when they did their work on this when they were still young. They'll have died of old age by the time this comes out.
it really bothers me Luke skipping throuhg the video and asking about stuff that he doesn't understand. Watch the whole thing, then you'll understand man. C'mon
Sunk. Cost. Fallacy. Some of y'all are so lost in the copium you'll never breathe the free air again. Also, lel mid gunplay. Mid at best. It's a fascinating story, experiment, we're all watching play out. Maybe in another 12 years there'll be an actual video game.
@@ginnungagaplemniscates1405 lol no shot, a game worth playing has never ever taken as long. It’s almost like If you keep moving the goalposts back to keep the investment money coming in, it just won’t get ever be made.
Love your content Luke but it's not a tech demo. Edit: I retract my statement, I see that you did actually recognize this and I followed the sheep below me. I was wrong
Oh man you angered the Star Citizen fan base with this one 😂. These poor people have been waiting for this game for a decade and still defend it at all costs. I’m glad I never became emotionally invested in this game cause I’d be mad as hell by this point
Thay just trying to get more investors, more money for Chris. For what they are showing it’s a lot and I don’t believe if this game is going ever to release.
you know how long gta6 is in the making a good game takes time and iam happy with that all that crap thats comming out these days better wait for something good
Regarding Star Citizen, there is a difference between never finishing building a game and never finishing building FOR a game. Since about 2016 CIG has committed to the latter.
How is this a deep dive with much half knowledge present? I feel you should do some better research and less randomly skipping around in something that would have answered multiple of the questions you raised
Everyone saying its not a tech demo. It's a tech demo. There's no reason to even believe that it was real game play being shown. Before anyone says to the contrary, just remember the very first Cyberpunk gameplay was completely fake. So until this game actually releases, if it ever releases its a tech demo in my eyes.
"the very first Cyberpunk gameplay was completely fake." Why do people keep repeating this? Did people not... you know... play the game? I played the *launch* version of the game and the gameplay shown in that original reveal lines up nearly perfectly with the gameplay in the then-final game. How does that make it fake? More polished than the rest of the game, maybe, but certainly not fake.
How is it saving gaming, it's been in development for 12 years. And based on what they just announced 12 years still to go. And squadrons are always 2 years away. Remember people pay for Star Citizen, not sq42
Mmmm... This video requires more forethought, so much misinformation. The SQ42 section was not a 'trailer' or a 'tech demo'. It was a demo just not a tech one, it was a demonstration of the first prologue mission played live at the convention even crashing 3 times. While CIG is and has been absolutely terrible with dates, information, false promises and general you know game making stuff, they are definitely headed in the right direction and continue to prove that there might be a game this century. Its unfortunate that Luke is always so hit and miss with most of his videos.
Clearing didn't watch any of Citcon, and still talking like before... sloth comes to mind. You know nothing of watch Star Citizen will be... go school yourself and watch the Star Citizen 1.0 panel from day 2 and come back with your thoughts then.
By the time this game releases, the actors will all be dead and the people that are interested in the game won't have seen them in anything and will have no idea who they are and the minimum GPU will be a 4070, which will have been obsolete for three generations.
The people in his twitch chat dont have a single thought behind their eyes.... all they do is hate and then dont even realise luke is showing off two different games. Star citizen and squadron 42. No they are not the same game. They are set in the same universe. But one is an mmo and the other is a singleplayer 3A campaign like the witcher or whatnot. No star citizen isnt releasing in 2026 its squadron 42. The sandworm is in star citizen not in squadron 42.
@@Icerz. i watched it live. its pre scripted demo that crashed multiple times forcing them to rewatch the sq42 intro cinematics multiple times, faces were glitching out into other faces, invisible guns and the most horrible gameplay youve ever seen that makes combat evolved look next gen
