Dear RSI, please give us a (YEAR) ETA for Squadron 42.

FreeLancerGriggs

Posts: 50

Posted:
Edited: by FreeLancerGriggs
Posted: -
It is a Single player game which will NOT need all the NETCODE, and other complexities the MMO will, and to a lessor extent the Solo Offline Server (hoping that is not dropped).


Without a doubt, SQ42 will reinvigorate/create new interest in this most ambitious endeavor, additionally it will provide us something to "play with" will the bigger game is completed.

Single Player games do get patched, SQ42 Needs to come out in 2017.

IF, it does that will provide a "buffer zone" for the main game as this will be a sort of Absolute Proof of Concept (apc) moment.

I speak ONLY for myself as backer who has in good trust supported financially this game.

I am within my rights to receive an ETA from the Devs.

However; if the game plan is to do the singleplayer AFTER the MMO is done, (From a continued ship purchase revenue stream this makes sense), it will poison some people who were most interested in the Single Player aspect of this game.

Mark Twain has a quote about "Faith"

Logic precludes me from accepting that.

Please stop with the "Fluff" (and distractions "let's praise our fanbase").

Hard dates are what truly matter.

As an Estimator for 30 Years, I was required to be correct, be lower than the competition, and provide the quote (sometimes in the millions of dollars) within a time limit, no job of mine in 30 years lost money....so I know this request in NOT unreasonable.


Dear Devs, I know you have people (probably volunteers) who monitor these threads....

Please do pass this up the food chain.


Hard Dates and STICK to them, this is what separates the good from the great.

Kindest Regards

TrentsCousin
  • Thermoluminescence

    Posts: 2341

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Soon™
    Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.
  • walltar

    Posts: 22789

    Posted:
    Edited: by walltar
    Posted:
    Edited:
    As someone who pledged because I wanted CIG to have freedom to do a game as they wanted (that means even pushing dates) I have to disagree with hard dates and sticking to them. If there is a good reason to push something back, I am all for it.

    Only thing is, I would like to know that reason, and I would like to know that something was pushed back before month after it was supposed to be out.

    As for ETA... This year, not in the beginning of it. It was said by Chris in latest SC gamestar article.
    oubk8o.jpg
  • Midnight_Wolf

    Posts: 899

    Posted:
    Posted:
    A lot of Star Citizen fans aren't even interested in Squadron 42, they are just waiting on the PU.

    Squadron 42 will be nice to play i'm sure, but yeah, not that excited about it.
    Starfarer Gemini (x2) │ Andromeda │ Vanguard │ Gladius │ Freelancer MIS
  • oracka

    Posts: 189

    Posted:
    Posted:
    i'd gladly support them holding SQ 42 and putting all hands on the PU.
  • Whiplash-1

    Posts: 11426

    Posted:
    Posted:
    There was a big fat "2016" on the SQ42 site last year. CIG missed it. What good will it do sticking a "2017" on there now? Just be patient and keep your fingers crossed they actually finish it this year.
    It's been fun, folks. See you around the verse.
  • Odan_Brota

    Posts: 86

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Probably best to just wait patiently. I doubt they'd announce another hard release date, since missing the dates repeatedly doesn't look good.
    y6kHlVP.png
  • Montoya

    Posts: 2894

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Chris tried giving us hard dates in the past, but they always backfired due to unexpected blockers.

    I think SQ42 is probably 90% done at this point, but giving a hard date and then missing it creates massive blowback and anger from the community which CIG prefers to avoid.

    Im on the edge of my seat for new news too, but hard dates... not a good idea.
    TEST
  • MT_travists

    Posts: 8985

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Only after they are sure that only unforeseeable hiccups are the only things that would throw it off. The date has been pushed back enough already, another missed announced date would be problematic and writing software is not exactly like putting up buildings.
    Acting Global Coordinator: Confederation of Free Traders
    0JO3TK.jpg
  • Starlin

    Posts: 13761

    Posted:
    Posted:

    "The ship stats page is always wrong. If for some reason it is right, then it will warp reality until it is wrong again." -Manic
    "An object at rest, cannot be stopped!" - The Evil Midnight Bomber (What Bombs at Midnight!)
  • Wainaa

    Posts: 10459

    Posted:
    Edited: by Wainaa
    Posted:
    Edited:
    Chris Roberts gave an ETA in Der Spiegel a few weeks back. It was "2017, probably"

    When they get to the point that they can give us dates that aren't just guesses, they'll add the details here:
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/schedule-report
  • Ultior

    Posts: 310

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Chaos_Fox:
    [hide]

    A lot of Star Citizen fans aren't even interested in Squadron 42, they are just waiting on the PU.

    Squadron 42 will be nice to play i'm sure, but yeah, not that excited about it.

    At the same time, SQ42 will be released before the PU. As fast as SQ42 comes out quickly :P ^^
    bannier_web_SC_anime_zpshtqkxgpd.gif
  • Rivethead318

    Posts: 3475

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Chaos_Fox:
    [hide]

    A lot of Star Citizen fans aren't even interested in Squadron 42, they are just waiting on the PU.

    Squadron 42 will be nice to play i'm sure, but yeah, not that excited about it.

    A lot of backers aren't even interested in Star Citizen, they are just waiting on the single-player, story-driven game Squadron 42.

    Squadron 42 should be awesome (Mass Effect on steroids). Star Citizen, as we've already seen, is going to be full of idiots. Yeah, not that excited about it.
    If you are new to Star Citizen, please consider using my referral code:

    STAR-KP3S-XZ4M

    Doing so will earn you 5,000 UEC! Which you can use to buy guns. Or something more practical like a......lamp.
  • Shankerz

    Posts: 6431

    Posted:
    Posted:
    In Chris We Trust. The game will be ready when CIG is ready for it. Be patient.
    Gank and Pod Kill anyone who avoids combat. Make them cry and harvest there yummy tears! /Hostile Pirate for life!
  • NtrepiD

    Posts: 686

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Chris tried giving us hard dates in the past, but they always backfired due to unexpected blockers.

    I think SQ42 is probably 90% done at this point, but giving a hard date and then missing it creates massive blowback and anger from the community which CIG prefers to avoid.

    Im on the edge of my seat for new news too, but hard dates... not a good idea.

    @Montoya I don't think it can be 90% done without Subsumption and Item 2.0.. Those are the foundations the missions, AI and ship component functionality are built on.

  • Rorinthas

    Posts: 3119

    Posted:
    Posted:
    It will be done when it will be done. There's no fixing it. I am sure that CIG is as exited to be able to sell Gold copies of SQ as we are to play it.
    In God We Trust, all others pay UEC and surrender their sidearms before coming aboard.
  • Dan_the_Great_1974

    Posts: 351

    Posted:
    OP, no idea in what line of work you do the estimates. Unless it is making computer games, then you will not be an expert in this field.
    That said i do agree that SQ 42 should be released this year. At least a beta version we can play.
  • Miggins

    Posts: 6785

    Posted:
    Edited: by Miggins
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]



    Only thing is, I would like to know that reason, and I would like to know that something was pushed back before month after it was supposed to be out.

    I'm with Walltar on this.

    I care little about some specific release date, but if CIG work out that there will be a delay in the date that THEY THINK something should be ready I would like them to tell me as soon as they discover themselves that there will be a delay, and why they think the delay happened. That's why I'm interested in this stuff, I've never been this close to seeing a game get created before, and I want to see where the delays are as well as have fun after the releases.

    I do like this thing though...

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/schedule-report

    i7/860 @ 2.8Ghz - 20G RAM - MSI GTX670 PE (driver 378.92) - W7/64 Pro.
  • WalkingLegacy

    Posts: 78

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    As someone who pledged because I wanted CIG to have freedom to do a game as they wanted (that means even pushing dates) I have to disagree with hard dates and sticking to them. If there is a good reason to push something back, I am all for it.

    Only thing is, I would like to know that reason, and I would like to know that something was pushed back before month after it was supposed to be out.

    As for ETA... This year, not in the beginning of it. It was said by Chris in latest SC gamestar article.

    Agreed
    Born to kill
  • angelarch

    Posts: 29047

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Probably best to just wait patiently. I doubt they'd announce another hard release date, since missing the dates repeatedly doesn't look good.

    Ya this. OP, Since CIG has already proven historically that they will miss absolute hard release dates, it makes no difference if they announce any more-- they will just miss those too.

    Just be patient and participate in their slow progress is all we can do really.


    TVfyvGZ.gif
  • Mercsn

    Posts: 927

    Posted:
    Posted:
    CIG replies: "After."
  • xPLAGUEISx

    Posts: 252

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I have a good feeling it will be released this year. 2017 will be a great year for SC as they are making great progresses and advances toward major releases.
    dnM7d0K.gif
  • Debido

    Posts: 5576

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Thats not how it works. We are giving him the cash to deliver the game when it is good and ready.

    This is not an engineering task where all the variables are known and the time to complete each task is a well known and documented deliverable?

    Any other questions?
  • Logicsol

    Posts: 17185

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    Chris tried giving us hard dates in the past, but they always backfired due to unexpected blockers.

    I think SQ42 is probably 90% done at this point, but giving a hard date and then missing it creates massive blowback and anger from the community which CIG prefers to avoid.

    Im on the edge of my seat for new news too, but hard dates... not a good idea.

    @Montoya I don't think it can be 90% done without Subsumption and Item 2.0.. Those are the foundations the missions, AI and ship component functionality are built on.

    Designing and building SQ42 doesn't really need those however.

    As important as item 2.0 is, at it's core it just allows for advanced asset behavior. The levels and primary assets can all be modeled without it.

    Same goes for Subsumption. While AI performance is key to the game, blocking out the mission design and setting up the how things are supposed to playout don't require it.

    Keep in mind it's not like subsumption is just going to get dropped into the game at the near final stages. While it may end up appearing that way from our perspective since we won't see it until the later stages; CiG has been working on, tweaking, troubleshooting and improving subsumption for the better part of 2 years now.
    Lhl72jE.jpg
  • Balleflass

    Posts: 51

    Posted:
    Posted:
    My first thought is that asking for ETA's is pointless because we are always far off what it turns out to be in reality.

    But we could always just take the mentioned ETA and add 2-3 months to it.

    Reality will most likely be ETA + our 2-3 months of expected delay + 6 extra months for the real delay.
  • Chompster

    Posts: 3763

    Posted:
    Edited: by Chompster
    Posted:
    Edited:
    giphy.gif

    Not gonna happen.
    [hide]

    [hide]

    [hide]

    Chris tried giving us hard dates in the past, but they always backfired due to unexpected blockers.

    I think SQ42 is probably 90% done at this point, but giving a hard date and then missing it creates massive blowback and anger from the community which CIG prefers to avoid.

    Im on the edge of my seat for new news too, but hard dates... not a good idea.

    @Montoya I don't think it can be 90% done without Subsumption and Item 2.0.. Those are the foundations the missions, AI and ship component functionality are built on.

    Designing and building SQ42 doesn't really need those however.

    As important as item 2.0 is, at it's core it just allows for advanced asset behavior. The levels and primary assets can all be modeled without it.

    Same goes for Subsumption. While AI performance is key to the game, blocking out the mission design and setting up the how things are supposed to playout don't require it.

    Keep in mind it's not like subsumption is just going to get dropped into the game at the near final stages. While it may end up appearing that way from our perspective since we won't see it until the later stages; CiG has been working on, tweaking, troubleshooting and improving subsumption for the better part of 2 years now.
    i don't think thats true at all, nor does it make much sense. Why would they make/use 2 completely separate systems for handling the same stuff in SQ42 and SC?9if thats what you're saying, could be wrong, if so ignore) They won't, because it doesn't make sense. Building SQ42 100% needs subsumption and itemport 2 as they use all the same systems and functions we'll have in SC(though some tweaked for the sake of a singleplayer maybe). Also don't agree that it doesn't need SS, of course you need to know how your Ai functions to make level that they can actually make use of. It'd be insane to make then completely separate from each other. Also I'm pretty sure they confirmed all this in the towns hall meetings and the talk with Tony Z and.. the German office guy in the video about Ai. both item port and SS came up a number of times in both those videos.
    |Cutlass|M50|Freelancer MIS|Saber|
    AwesomeCutlassIbackedforin2013.jpg
  • angelarch

    Posts: 29047

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    My first thought is that asking for ETA's is pointless because we are always far off what it turns out to be in reality.

    But we could always just take the mentioned ETA and add 2-3 months to it.

    Reality will most likely be ETA + our 2-3 months of expected delay + 6 extra months for the real delay.

    "ETA + our 2-3 months of expected delay + 6 extra months for the real delay" + a year to go back and redo everything, which is CIG's favorite pastime.


    TVfyvGZ.gif
  • Balleflass

    Posts: 51

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    My first thought is that asking for ETA's is pointless because we are always far off what it turns out to be in reality.

    But we could always just take the mentioned ETA and add 2-3 months to it.

    Reality will most likely be ETA + our 2-3 months of expected delay + 6 extra months for the real delay.

    "ETA + our 2-3 months of expected delay + 6 extra months for the real delay" + a year to go back and redo everything, which is CIG's favorite pastime.

    Guess it's back in hibernation for me then.
    No point staying here when there is no useful info to get except for YET ANOTHER CONCEPT SALE.
    We get some small nitpicks in the mail from CR and thats it, then I go to the RSI site and there is nothing else.
  • Wainaa

    Posts: 10459

    Posted:
    Edited: by Wainaa
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    [hide]

    Chris tried giving us hard dates in the past, but they always backfired due to unexpected blockers.

    I think SQ42 is probably 90% done at this point, but giving a hard date and then missing it creates massive blowback and anger from the community which CIG prefers to avoid.

    Im on the edge of my seat for new news too, but hard dates... not a good idea.

    @Montoya I don't think it can be 90% done without Subsumption and Item 2.0.. Those are the foundations the missions, AI and ship component functionality are built on.

    Designing and building SQ42 doesn't really need those however.

    As important as item 2.0 is, at it's core it just allows for advanced asset behavior. The levels and primary assets can all be modeled without it.

    Same goes for Subsumption. While AI performance is key to the game, blocking out the mission design and setting up the how things are supposed to playout don't require it.

    Keep in mind it's not like subsumption is just going to get dropped into the game at the near final stages. While it may end up appearing that way from our perspective since we won't see it until the later stages; CiG has been working on, tweaking, troubleshooting and improving subsumption for the better part of 2 years now.
    CIG disagrees with you about needing subsumption for SQ42.

    Edit: Well, at least the first iteration of it.

    BiWXsrq.png
  • ilkhani

    Posts: 823

    Posted:
    Edited: by ilkhani
    Posted:
    Edited:
    Between Q4 2017 and Q2 2018.
    signature_RSI.jpg
  • Rivethead318

    Posts: 3475

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    I have a good feeling it will be released this year. 2017 will be a great year for SC as they are making great progresses and advances toward major releases.

    So do I. I think SQ42 will be released this year. But it won't be playable until 2018 after several patches. Despite CR statements to the contrary, I think our impatience as a community is going to force CIG to release SQ42 in 2017. It'll lack some polish and bug fixing that only come after much QAing (and CIG needs the backers to do a lot of the heavy lifting on the QA).

    So... rejoice in SQ42 being released this year. Watch the intro screen. And then shelve it until the third or fourth patch are released. That's my plan and how I see this playing out.....
    If you are new to Star Citizen, please consider using my referral code:

    STAR-KP3S-XZ4M

    Doing so will earn you 5,000 UEC! Which you can use to buy guns. Or something more practical like a......lamp.
Sign In or Register to comment.