|
News | Video

Star Citizen plans for 2017 revealed. 3.0 coming June

A lengthy Star Citizen update from CIG dropped into mailboxes detailing plans for this year and a date for the much talked about 3.0 update.

First of all, let’s get the date set for 3.0, which according to CIG, will be at the end of June. The 3.0 update is a big deal because this is the first time they will release the planetary tech for the public to try after it’s debut in video last year. This will include three moons around Crusader, Cellin, Yela and Daymar. A lengthy page of completed features for 3.0 can be found on the schedule report page. Scroll down because each feature set has its own schedule or check out the image below.

Star Citizen

CIG point out that not all the landing zones will be ready, this is in part down to Behaviour no longer working on the project which means they have had to replace the environment team with internal hires. Behaviour has now moved on from Star Citizen and they are now creating their own game.

The purpose of this lengthy update is to who what is in the works right up until December. Frustratingly there is no mention of a Squadron 42 release date and the above schedule does not feature any Squadron 42 goals. Still, progress is trundling along albeit at a delayed pace.

Let’s hope CIG can meet these goals and Star Citizen starts to become more of game and less of a tech demo. If more delays start to surface this year CIG could find themselves with even more refund requests to fulfill.



Related to this article

Comments

  • Bjørn Sandåker

    Tech demo? Refunds? You have been reading too much on Derek Smart’s blog, I think.

    • Paul Younger

      Sadly not. I play it and am a backer so yeh, tech demo.

      • Bjørn Sandåker

        Then you don’t know what “tech demo” means.

  • vander

    It is pretty disrespectful to call a game in development (alpha version) as a tech demo – where’s the professionalism?

    Well anyway. It is great to see that there’s at least one game that wants to push space game genre forward and it is good to see them be open about schedules. Hopefully editors in websites finally would understand how complex the game and how much work is required.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqv78x5ZEwE

    • Paul Younger

      That’s just my opinion on it so… I think most folk working on videogame website understand the complexities of game development, schedules and budgets. Having visited many, many studios and talked to hundred of developers over the past 20 year I know I do.

      • vander

        Well, unfortunately there way to often phrases like “development is slow” when it is obvious that editors has no access to development branches and therefore have no idea how the development is going. It just makes immediately clear that the editor doesn’t have a clue or the article is about getting more clicks.

        Opinions are a bit tricky because in forums anyone can give them without giving an argument but on articles the editor should make clear it is just his opinion or else (s)he should give some arguments.

        It will be interesting to see if CIG’s latest videos and mails changes anything. Professional game journalism is still something I would be more than happy to pay for.

      • samplerico

        Well, technically youre right, as of right now the PU its a tech demo because you don’t have gameplay you just have a bunch of bad arranged features, and the FPS mechanics and animations are awfull. Arena Commander tho its a very different story. Competitive dogfights, Coop, and races are very fun, and can be seen as an independent game as of right now. Its actually very fun, and thers a very active competitive community for AC that prooves the core of the game is fun and well designed.

        • vander

          Why should we start to call alpha versions as tech demos? Alpha versions are buggy, missing features, etc. PU currently has gameplay in form of missions and PvP but of course it still simple its own way (technically complex compared to many other games). SC PU Alpha 3.0 will integrate more features for testing.

          • samplerico

            You can’t even trade…. a very very basic feature of any space sim. Yeah you have missions but you can’t even actually play against AI, the AI of the ships is just a placeholder and the missions are very generic. Be honest, thers no gameplay in the PU, only very basic stuff, all palceholders, and not a single mechanic besides dogfight. Arena Commander is an Alpha, the PU its just a demo with some features, so yeah you can call it tech demo IMHO. They launched earlier the PU because the needed to launch something to calm down the backers and make time for Star Marine and 3.0, 2.0 was a hurried mess, and something not planned until very late. I love AC tho.

            • vander

              PU is in alpha stage and it currently has only some basic features and more to come in upcoming alpha releases. Placeholders, broken and missing features are normal in alphas.
              Trading is not a requirement for a space sim.

            • samplerico

              You win. hurra!

            • vander

              Well, fortunately there is no winners or losers here – just discussion 🙂

              Time to time people in forums wants to express their dislike by calling a game “a tech demo” – like for example Crysis. As I have understood PC Invasion is not about being objective. Unfortunately the texts are not very clear about that.

            • samplerico

              Objectivity doesn’t exist forget that chimera. Just saying…

            • vander

              Maybe not in absolute form but at least editors could try to be as objective as possible. In the other hand people expect different things. I expect to get professional information from the articles which I’m able to use to form my own opinion about the matter.

              At what point are you going start to call SC PU as alpha instead of tech demo?

            • samplerico

              I have no problem in calling alpha to the PU, i always do. Im just saying that you could technically call tech demo to this alpha, because the lack of gameplay and basic game mechanics, story, characters, AI, player interaction etc etc etc.

              Tell me one professional objective news media or press, please.

            • vander

              But it has simple AI, simple game mechanisms, player interaction, etc.

              Tell me one professional objective news media or press, please.

              I don’t know any but can’t wait to read a game media that even tries to be one. It would be a step forward if editors could give some arguments to their claims and opinions.

  • Joe_Blober

    This is great CIG provide such schedule. This is giving another good level of transparency together with ATV’s including more unknown pictures an interview (the one this week about Banu).

    Some date will be reached before, some other after (I won’t call push of dates a missed for a project under heavy work). Even better this schedule is dynamic and updated weekly.

    CIG provide a next patch schedule since January. It looks like this satisfied most backers requests as a petition launched two months ago (Prove your claim of “Open Development”) is stuck at 59 despite a cap of 100 and public visibility through forums and sites. Which mean that 0.012% of 500.000 backers (assuming those 59 are backers…) or to be positive, 99.988 % do not fill the need to express a disatisfaction, hence refund of any kind.

    Of course that won’t excuse any project director to take it as a go to deliver crap. To put in perspective this precise point.

    Another good news, Sandi said that SQ42 schedule will be provider later.

    By later I do not expect anything before October as some tech of 3.0 to 3.2 (the one delivered in 2017) may be included in SQ42. Definitively end of 2017 will provide a much clearer picture to everyone about both SQ42 and SC.