Star Citizen's Planet Exploration Update Is Delayed To Early September

R.S.I. has encountered some stability issues with the 3.0 update but the new date isn't too far out.

33

Star Citizen, arguably one of the most polarizing video games ever even before release, is back in the news but not for the most wonderful of reasons. The upcoming 3.0 update to their ongoing Alpha is possibly the largest from developers Roberts Space Industries to date, allowing for flight transition from outer space all the way down to planetside exploration with no loading times among other updates. Instead of coming out in August, Eurogamer reports that the 3.0 update has been pushed back to early September.

The foundation of the update seems to be in place, but Roberts Space Industries ran into some stability problems with the update after entering the polishing stage and they also encounter issues with the patcher. With the Alpha largely being a space for developers to iron out bugs and enhance stability, it’s encouraging to see that the R.S.I. development team is trying to put a little shine on their 3.0 milestone.

In response to backlash from the delay, Roberts Space Industries’ Director of Player Relations did a more extensive breakdown of the production schedule for 3.0 and the issues up to this point. In it, he points out that 3.0 “introduces a level of tech and infrastructure that’s an order of magnitude larger and more complex than all of our previous versions combined.”

There are no financial struggles for the game, as rumors once had it, but there's still no release window yet for Star Citizen or its single-player Squadron 42 experience. 3.0 is expected to go live sometime between September 4th and 8th if you want to check out what is shaping up to be one of the most sci-fi games to date. Just...make sure you don't cheat if you decide to play.

News Editor

Charles Singletary Jr keeps the updates flowing as the News Editor, breaking stories while investigating the biggest topics in gaming and technology. He's pretty active on Twitter, so feel free to reach out to him @The_CSJR. Got a hot tip? Email him at Charles.Singletary@Shacknews.com.

From The Chatty
  • reply
    July 31, 2017 2:40 PM

    Charles Singletary posted a new article, Star Citizen's Planet Exploration Update Is Delayed To Early September

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 3:12 PM

      In before..something, I guess.

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 3:29 PM

      Not surprised.
      There's some netcode instability they're having a hard time getting fixed right now. They probably want to leave it in the tester's hands for a bit longer to verify the recent changes have worked that out.

      I'm ok with it honestly. It's a gigantic patch, I want them to get it done right.

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 3:40 PM

      Link to 3.0 Production Calendar:

      https://robertsspaceindustries.com/schedule-report

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 5:02 PM

      3.0 release delays is pretty hugely controversial. At last year's Gamescon, Chris Roberts announced that 3.0 would be ready by December, claiming the full Stanton system would be ready. However, that's been completely changed to only a few moons being ready, but those moons are of a much better fidelity, with ship wrecks and missions. Following their progress weekly, I have been a bit disappointed with the constant delays, but the dates they provide us are their dev dates which are always aggressive to encourage devs to constantly work hard.

      There is a ton of cool visual tech coming and I think 3.0 also has a lot of under-the-hood tech included as well. One of the biggest criticisms has been a lack of a game. They needed to make a lot of this core tech come online first before they could start having a game.

      • reply
        July 31, 2017 5:16 PM

        this games features are going from galactic to galaxy to solar system

        • reply
          July 31, 2017 5:18 PM

          What?


          • reply
            July 31, 2017 5:20 PM

            I'm just saying they had a huge list at the start and promised hundreds of planets, now they just keep reducing things and justify it by upping the detail of the few objects they do create. I'm not saying it's bad, I don't want to see them go down the path that no man's sky did. Chris just needs to learn to keep his mouth shut and listen more to his teams.

            • reply
              July 31, 2017 5:26 PM

              That's not changed? They will still release with a huge list of planets.

              • reply
                July 31, 2017 5:31 PM

                I'm doubtful of that, I'm guessing some sort of episodic content releases similar to their current major revision system.

                • reply
                  July 31, 2017 5:44 PM

                  They are basically an MMO. Their stated plans are 50-60 systems upon release (leaving beta) and from then adding systems as they come online/in batches until they reach their 125 system goal.

                  Their goal for when entering beta is 5-10 systems.

                  • reply
                    July 31, 2017 5:54 PM

                    I think they will hit a lot of the features they promised but they sure as hell are not sticking to the repeated time frame revisions they have given

                    • reply
                      July 31, 2017 5:56 PM

                      I don't think anyone in the SC community believes any release date they provide.

            • reply
              July 31, 2017 5:42 PM

              Ummm... this is just for the patch, not for release.
              Release plans haven't changed.

              • reply
                July 31, 2017 5:50 PM

                And the set in stone release date is?

                • reply
                  July 31, 2017 6:58 PM

                  obviously not set in stone... don't be intellectually dishonest.
                  It's about feature set, not dates.

                  • reply
                    July 31, 2017 7:02 PM

                    I'm sorry, I'm doing a poor job of trying to convey that I think they promised X on time frame Y, and they keep adjusting Y. I really don't think "final" will be even in 2 years or less.

                  • Zek
                    reply
                    July 31, 2017 11:20 PM

                    It's always about dates. Will this game still be relevant in 2022?

        • reply
          July 31, 2017 5:53 PM

          It's called "Star citizen" -- that's one star. :)

      • reply
        August 1, 2017 8:05 AM

        but the dates they provide us are their dev dates which are always aggressive to encourage devs to constantly work hard

        Sounds like they need to try a different tactic.

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 5:06 PM

      Planet exploration? Holy shit, have they ever bitten off more than they can chew.

      • reply
        July 31, 2017 5:19 PM

        2035's No Man's Sky

      • reply
        July 31, 2017 5:25 PM

        im still pretty excited for this game, i just think things are going to be a lot less massive at release than they promise but they seem to be taking their time and doing this correctly. i woudl expect a project this massive to have delays, but its hard to generate a lot of excitement with people if you said "yea i expect this will come out in 12 years"

      • reply
        August 1, 2017 1:01 AM

        They now have 420+ persons on payroll, and $153 mill donated so far. At this point, few things are impossible for them if they can keep themselves afloat.

        • reply
          August 1, 2017 2:16 AM

          That so? Ubisoft had 10 of their 29 studios working on Assassin's Creed Unity and at the time they had a bit less than 10,000 employees across all their studios.

          For reference, Blackflag had a development team of about 900 spread across 7 studios with a development budget of $100 million.

          I doubt anyone believes that there's nothing impossible for Ubisoft even though their resources dwarf RSI / CIG's and they have a colossal technology base built up for many many years to support their games.

          Even the scope of Beyond Good and Evil 2 is smaller than SC's in features, gameplay, and shear size, and who knows how massive that development will be once they ramp up.

          • reply
            August 1, 2017 4:28 AM

            Sure, but Ubisoft needs to crank out AC games in order to keep its financial stakeholders happy, so they have a deadline. Chris Roberts is free to take as long as necessary.

            • reply
              August 1, 2017 5:54 AM

              Does that make sense? If I hire 500 developers then I'll need to pay 500 developers. Pay for insurance. Pay rent. Pay utilities. Pay for licenses and subscriptions and much much more. Unless I have an infinite supply of money, then there's a very real deadline.

              I suppose if they can indefinitely raise enough money to support the burn of 500 heads then they can spend as long as they want, but I doubt that's sustainable with no product.

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 5:48 PM

      Suprise

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 7:55 PM

      did the article mention how CIG announced a sale of some sort of ground based vehicle, and then proceeded to announce the delay a week later? Cause that’s shady as fuck

      • reply
        July 31, 2017 7:59 PM

        Their ship pipeline is not tied to the releases. They have a whole dedicated team to concepting, modeling, and implementing ships. Because of this, they put out a new concept ship every month. Whether that coincides with a delay or release is purely coincidental. They are developing it like an MMO and the ship pipeline is one of those aspects that will continue to run long after the game is "released"

      • reply
        August 1, 2017 3:16 AM

        They release an update to their production schedule every Friday.

        https://robertsspaceindustries.com/schedule-report

        These are their internal estimates that the devs use.

        So you could say they announced the ground based vehicle and then proceeded to announce the delay a week later, or you could say they announced a previous delay the previous Friday and then started the buggy sale.

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 7:56 PM

      I've been playing Chris Roberts games for over 20 years. Saying one of his games is delayed is like saying Activision is making another "Call of Duty". Of course it is.

      • reply
        July 31, 2017 11:23 PM

        Yeah it's totally normal to collect 150 million dollars and not deliver 1/10 of what you promised after 5 years. It's like Call of Duty man, don't worry about it. Fuck that guy and his black hole!

        • reply
          August 1, 2017 8:27 AM

          5 years is nothing for a game of this scope. You've seen the videos and what they are trying to do, right? Nothing about this game is normal; that's the point.

          I donated and would be out like $250 if the game fails or tanks, who cares. I knew the risks; as should everyone who donated. I say fuck it, Roberts and the rest should try to get as much money as possible and make the biggest, most insanely detailed game possible and take as long as it takes (and they can survive) to get it right. It's not like I'm short on games in my backlog to play.

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 10:52 PM

      I'm pissed at them for other reasons.. I bought X ship some time ago.. it's still not available in game. Now they release a pack with X+Y total price being cheaper than what I spent on X plus what I would spend on Y.
      Essentially this: because I bought X ship early, I have to pay more now for Y.

      It pretty much seals any chance of them getting more funding from me.. although that was likely at a dead end anyway.

      • reply
        August 1, 2017 8:03 AM

        This is the exact reason I quit buying Battlefield games. Back in BF3 days it barely worked when it came out I bought it day 1. People that pre ordered got free dlc, and people that waited a few months got the game with all the dlc included for the same price I payed. Meanwhile I just kinda felt shafted

      • reply
        August 1, 2017 12:24 PM

        So melt your ship, get credits back, and buy the new one w/ x+y

        Pretty easy to do, really.

        • reply
          August 1, 2017 7:00 PM

          That would cost $25 more. 'Warbond' aka cash price is $25 less than using store credit, thus melting and buying is more expensive again.

    • reply
      July 31, 2017 11:34 PM

      Populate this motherfucker with tons of stuff to do and I'll play the shit out of it. If it's filled with nothing but fetch quests and dog fighting, I will be supremely disappointed.

    • reply
      August 1, 2017 12:12 AM

      As much as I would like to see the 3.0 patch released, I think CIG knows that it must be pretty well polished or risk a media shitstorm. With 1+ million backers, an Alpha is no longer an alpha regardless of what you say.

    • reply
      August 1, 2017 12:40 AM

      Does the alpha have multi crew gameplay yet?

      • reply
        August 1, 2017 12:59 AM

        Yes, to a limited degree. You can have a crew inside your ship, and they can control the turrets. The turret control leaves something to be desired though, that and more will be fixed in this upcoming release.

        • reply
          August 1, 2017 3:09 AM

          I think there is basic co-pilot functionality as well, managing shields and power distribution or something.

    • reply
      August 1, 2017 1:31 AM

      I would like to refund this, as I don't even play games on PC anymore, but I think I have used a debit card I no longer have for this. In any case, I didn't spend too much and they have sent me two t-shirts instead of one, so it almost balances out.

    • reply
      August 1, 2017 3:08 AM

      I think the article has a major flaw. It says Robert Space Industries (RSI) is making the game, but the actual company is Cloud Imperium Games (CIG). RSI is simply an in-game ship manufacturer brand.

      That's a pretty significant mistake for any journalist to make.

      • reply
        August 1, 2017 3:30 AM

        Sort of, CIG might be the main company name in the US for whatever developers are hired directly by them, yes, but RSI is also one of the real companies involved, being the party that markets and is supposed to launch the game. Straight from the space horses space mouth:

        Cloud Imperium Games Corporation and its subsidiary Roberts Space Industries™ Corp. were founded in April 2012 by renowned game developer Chris Roberts (Wing Commander, Freelancer, Privateer) and his business partner and long-time international media attorney Ortwin Freyermuth.
        ...
        Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are being marketed and launched via www.robertsspaceindustries.com.

        • reply
          August 1, 2017 3:55 AM

          Man that's confusing as hell

          I know it says RSI on the main Star Citizen website, but then you hear things like CIG says "..." and never RSI says "..."

        • reply
          August 1, 2017 4:05 AM

          According to Wikipedia, RSI is the parent company.
          CIG is the US and UK dev departments, while Foundry 42 is a subsidiary of CIG and is their German dev department.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_Imperium_Games

    • reply
      August 1, 2017 5:50 AM

      Is there a game yet? I mean, that's playable.

    • reply
      August 1, 2017 6:05 AM

      With inflation, those that paid early will have paid less!

    • reply
      August 1, 2017 6:57 AM

      I really can't say I care all that much. Take your time, Chris Roberts. There is plenty of other shit to play, and if more time helps you make the best damn space sim on the planet, and you continue to release incremental progress builds for us, it's cool.

      • reply
        August 1, 2017 7:50 AM

        Fucking signed. It's not like there's a glut of AAA space sims out there nowadays, and there are plenty of other gaming options available to occupy people while Chris Roberts does this thing. Maybe he'll fail hard, but there's 400+ people out there working to try and deliver on what he's promised. And that's a lot more than what you've seen from a Kickstarter like Mighty No. 9.

        • reply
          August 1, 2017 8:34 AM

          SC's biggest win is showing there's still a market for space Sim games. We've seen a huge influx of them since their Kickstarter. Good and terrible.

      • reply
        August 1, 2017 12:26 PM

        a-fucking-men

    • reply
      August 1, 2017 7:24 AM

      Not surprised. Not worried. They bit off more than they could chew, and have yet to define scope. It will settle down.