I think it's gonna be crap. Gut feeling. They spend so much time talking about all the nifty things that you are going to be able to do, but in the videos it looks extremely slow and boring. Plus the no-pvp button, instances, P2W, the circus things, the way they try to make people pay for things - it's just too much, especially when you take what you read and compare it to what you see... Super slow and uninspired combat that mostly seems like a display window for ships.
If you are expecting overly arcade space shooter like Freelancer you've got the wrong game.
Combat speeds are comparable to Freelancer, however ships do have some actual inertia. Flight control needs some polishing (there are several idiotic limitations) as well as the user interface.
The no-pvp thing is legitimately bad, unfortunately. It was added after the carebearish types took hold and started whining all over the place.
No idea where you got the pay-to-win part from. There aren't any "golden" cash-only ships or equipment planned so far.
Playing it also warms up my room. Not good for summer.
I do expect Star Citizen to be very "arcade-like" (it certainly looks that way) - just super slow and void of finesse.
The insurance bit for original backers is a pay2win of sorts (it can be argued, I know) - it makes it cheaper to take risks, and that is a comparable advantage over other players in a multiplayer environment, although it doesn't manifest itself as stronger guns or heavier hull or other "direct" advantages.
There's nothing wrong with slower combat speeds, it makes things a little more tactical and less reflex based, which tends to draw in older players who dont like the twitch fps style of faster games.
They could just as well design cap ship combat to be slow and all about tactics and strategy (to favor one kind of a player) while leaving dogfights and overall snub combat to be quick and about skills and reflexes (to favor an other kind), with very restricted overlaps of the two. If you replace one with the other instead of having both kinds of encounters at the same time, you are switching one playerbase for an other, instead of trying to have them both.
Far as I can tell even the smallest 1 seater ships are still fairly large, having internal sleeping quarters, toilets, mess rooms, cargo bays, so on and so forth. Ship interiors are supposed to be fully functional and explorable as well.
I'll take slower combat in exchange for that kind of immersion and detail any day.
I for one an fairly excited for Star Citizen, I try not to buy into most of the hype, and I haven't pledged any real money yet either, but it really does look like a game that'll be something most of us here in communities like this have been waiting for.
The degree of immersion and detail in individual ships, and the fact that there will be some character customization too, is something that gets my attention, since I love stuff like that.
My only hope is that all the effort they put into details and immersion enhancing factors won't go to waste when everyone just goes into RED IS DEAD mode.
Provided that Star Citizen encourages and includes lots of RP potential and roleplayers in general, I think it'll turn out to be excellent.
(08-10-2014, 10:35 PM)Protégé Wrote: I have paid like 75$ for it
Are you saying you've paid for something you haven't tried yourself because is not a finished product yet and there is no guarantee it will be like how it looks like at the moment?
Hype train that made me forever resistant to any early-access games.
(08-10-2014, 08:00 PM)Tenacity Wrote: Anyone looking into this?
Of course, it's going to be the the game Roberts imagined Freelancer would be before cutting of funds/time.
As for the ships not being as agile, that has a lot to do with the realism part. If you manoeuvred as sharply as in Freelancer, you'd pass out immediately or you'd just die in case of LFs...