Do you have a source for this? As far as I remember they never specified they had plans for there to be anything more than a vanilla version. I could only agree with your logic here if this is true. I realize it's just semantics whether we wanna say it was an outright lie or technically not. You clearly understand that what they did was shady and that's good enough for me! I guess I'm more vindictive, I don't want to give the slightest impression that what they did is ok by saying they were truthful in the end.

I don't recall them ever apologizing, only going radio silent for months after the game launched, so I have no respect for them, but I can respect those that still do. No denying that it's better to fix the game later than never at all, but I still don't want to give them praise so as to not encourage a repeat.

All I can say is thank all the gods you have zero power in the industry and it's not up to you. 

It would be a crappy world if people couldn't move forward.  I'll judge the next game they make based on its own merits and I hope it's great because great games are more important to me than feelings of spite.

So what if it failed at launch? Do you honestly think they would've kept going updating the game for three years to fulfill the promise?

"Believing". You knew they couldnt deliever. You should ve known. Everybody should ve known, but the press and the community chose to stay oblivious to the fact that some dozen weak backyard indie developer on a limited budget, within 3 years time span cannot develop the sci fi space adventure of your dreams and anyone who believed they could AND pre ordered/bought at release was a fool to do so. 

No one was forced by anyone to buy the game at release without reading reviews. Who the hell does that in this day and age? I do when i know exaclty what to expect, in content and quality. RE2R for example.

As ive mentioned, i ve bought NMS couple of weeks ago. I didnt expect much, not because of all the negativ hubbub. I naturally dont expect much from indie devs. I invested 10h into it and i got nowhere. Dead end after dead end, combined with the hardcore excessive obligatory grind/mining and i was done. How anyone can deem this good gaming is beyond me. My job has more entertainment value than NMS.

Well yeah.But this one is on the gamers.While on No Mans Lie they paid once because they thought they were receiveing something different, in Star Citizen case they just kept payed while knowing they were being played.

I would tend to agree. Even more because on NMS people recognize they were lied to (even if they forgive and forget), but in Star Citizen we have seem people still defending and saying they are receiving what they paid for.

Wow there are people who will still defend Murray on his lies and blame gamers lol.

Anyways good on them for continuing to improve the game.

These are the options for multiplayer

I don't know if turning ambient multiplayer off will also get rid of other people's claimed planets. Honestly I haven't seen any yet. You just see other people in the space anomaly station, I haven't run into anyone else yet outside it. Co-op works a treat though.

I'm already 40 hours into the Beyond update. I started a new save yet using my old 80 hour save from launch for resources for my 10 year old. It's not hard to collect them yourselves but kids are lazy nowadays :) It's actually a lot easier to make money than at launch, but also a lot more to spend the various currencies on.

I'm surprised the game is still getting hate, it was the same with DriveClub. I didn't hesitate one second to buy another copy of the game for co-op play, fully deserved imo. There are plenty 60 dollar (currently 90 in Canada) games I get bored of after a few hours.... This game continues to wow me, on flat tv as well as in VR. Yes, it's still buggy, glitchy, drops frames, loses co-op connection, flat out crashes (about once every 10 hours so far) but what other game lets you drill a hole into the ground to shelter from a fire storm to continue tunneling to your next objective.

It's all busy work or grinding in the end, yet also very relaxing, much less stressful and less tedious than Elite Dangerous. Elite Dangerous is a lot more realistic, which also means one earth like planet in 50 systems which you still can't land on, while most airless planets (you can land on) are simple barren rock worlds with much less variation in 'structures'. The draw of ED is the realistic version of the galaxy, the draw of NMS is something different in every system. In ED you set course for a nebula to explore and the sky changes depending on where you are in the galaxy while in NMS travel seems rather pointless. The sky is the star in ED, the planets are the star in NMS.

You always keep waiting for Star Citizen :) I'm going to find a Korvax scientist!

You know when that game does reach it's release, it's still going to garner all kinds of hate, along with refusal or acceptance that it even reached releasing and delivering more, or what was asked. You cite DC for getting hate, which you don't think is deserved, along with NMS, but I'm going to take a wild shot in the dark and assume you think it's deserved for SC, despite how the other two started out and ended up.

I'm not even sure why it was mentioned though. Wasn't Viv just talking about viewing other's creations within NMS?. 

Is this space anomaly station necessary to advance?

I really don't want to see anyone in my universe. If I wanted that I'd play MMOs.