Star Citizen Devs Address Rumors About The Game’s Size At Release

Star Citizen faced reports of financial trouble, but Cloud Imperium Games recently spoke out to deflect them. Recent loan advances were described as a “smart move” for future funding. Star Citizen is in alpha on PC.
Star Citizen faced reports of financial trouble, but Cloud Imperium Games recently spoke out to deflect them. Recent loan advances were described as a “smart move” for future funding. Star Citizen is in alpha on PC. Cloud Imperium Games

Star Citizen backers have invested over $100 million dollars based on promises of a massive, explorable representation of space with over 100 unique star systems. However, following reddit translations of a recent interview with Germany’s GameStar magazine, it was suggested that scope had changed.

The translation in question was posted last week and featured a written conversation with Cloud Imperium Games director Chris Roberts. In a section called “Everything Procedural, Or What,” the source said that Roberts had planned to have five to 10 star systems available for the game’s release.

While that threshold definitely sounds like it would offer plenty of space for a massive group of players to explore, it wasn’t what backers were promised. When the game passed its $6 million stretch goal in Aug. 2012, CIG claimed that it could build a finished product with 100 star systems. That number has been repeatedly mentioned in streams and episodes of Around The Verse for the past five years.

With this open contradiction in mind, CIG Community Manager Tyler Witkin took to the project’s official forums to explain the studio’s side of the matter. Here’s what he said:

“Hey guys! This is a case of things being lost in translation; Chris was asked a specific question about how many systems we expect to have online at the point that we've got most of the core mechanics completed and we would consider the gameplay experience suitable for a larger audience. There are no changes with regards to the planned amount of systems which are well documented on the current Star Map.

“Also, it’s important to remember that the scope of the game has increased greatly since the original crowdfunding campaign. Since those early days we’ve created procedural planet tech, moved from 32 bit to 64 bit… all of it leading to billions of kilometers of space and millions of square kilometers of landmass to explore, all rendered in detail that matches the most detailed first-person games that only have to worry about a few dozen kilometers of playable area.

“This takes time to fill out, so while it will take us longer to fully deliver and populate every system at this fidelity rather than if we had only a handful of points of interest per star system, we have no intention of reducing the size of the Star Citizen universe.”

The statement itself sounds fairly concrete, but there are still a few reasons to take it with a grain of salt. While the question in particular refers to a point in development when most of the core mechanics and netcode are ready for a large number of players, might that technically be the same thing as launch? We suppose it could be a beta, but that’s not entirely clear.

It’s also worth pointing out that the second paragraph in particular seems to be intentionally lowering fan expectation for the game’s initial release. Witkin is right that conditions do change over five years of creation, but, given Star Citizen’s passionate fan base, that sensible explanation may not be enough to permit the disregard of past promises.

Translations should always be examined carefully, however, and this advice has been especially true for Star Citizen, a game with countless global connections. Just last week, translations also sparked community confusion regarding player caps in alpha 3.0. As it stands right now, the official word is that Star Citizen will still be 100 star systems deep at its largest.

Star Citizen alphas are available for backers on PC.

Will Star Citizen ever be able to deliver on its 100 star system promise? Is CIG fluffing over a translation that was actually correct? Tell us in the comments section!

Join the Discussion
Top Stories