Star Citizen's single-player spin-off is now playable start to finish, still set for 2026

[Squid Surprise]

CIG is now listing SC/SQ42 ships as "playable" and "concept" to new backers. The "playable" ones are more that just "pixel" ships as you call them. Anyone who backs a concept ship well, IMO, its "shame on them" and not "shame on CIG" if they pledge for it and find, DOH! It doesn't fly!

They didn’t do that originally… I assume it was because of the backlash of people paying cash for ships they couldn’t use that changed this..

Pixel ships. Right! You would have to be a perfect dolt to pledge for a "concept" ship and then expect it to be playable right now. Then again, there are some backers....

As we all know, there are a LOT of “dolts” out there! After all, they’ve made close to a billion dollars over 15+ years and only have a buggy alpha to show for it…

 

[AlexIL]

They were highly successful and ground breaking at the time. The Wing Commander series was the most recognized in the public eye, but speaking from the viewpoint of having played Strike Commander, it was equally as ground-breaking as the Wing Commander series and very enjoyable to play. I still have my copy of it and I'm tempted to install it in DOS Box and give it another go.

Privateer was also an excellent game, IMO.

Honestly, however, I was not happy with Wing Commander Academy.

Very true. No one could possibly make a game like SC or SQ42 on their own, nor could they make Wing Commander or Strike Commander on their own, either.

You're probably wasting your keystrokes on this plea since think SC SQ42 is an overpriced scam, they probably figure its not worth their time.

Just a little detail. Wing Commander got released only after Chris Roberts was removed. Microsoft took over and released the game.

 

[Burty117]

You're probably wasting your keystrokes on this plea since think SC SQ42 is an overpriced scam, they probably figure its not worth their time.

Yeah the moment a word (such as scam) is used in a context that simply doesn't fit, you know they don't understand what the word means.

Besides, Star Citizen has free fly events where anyone can try the game out, usually a few times a year, I'm not aware of any other "scams" out there that do that.
Star Citizen has more daily players than some actually released MMO's, maybe those MMO's are also scams?
You would have thought, after 15 long years, CIG would have been through the courts and justice system, closed down as one giant scam, it's strange they're still operating...

But na, just a scam innit, and that scam is a definite scam, by definition, it's a scam, so scam? Agreed, scam...

 

[Squid Surprise]

Yeah the moment a word (such as scam) is used in a context that simply doesn't fit, you know they don't understand what the word means.

Besides, Star Citizen has free fly events where anyone can try the game out, usually a few times a year, I'm not aware of any other "scams" out there that do that.
Star Citizen has more daily players than some actually released MMO's, maybe those MMO's are also scams?
You would have thought, after 15 long years, CIG would have been through the courts and justice system, closed down as one giant scam, it's strange they're still operating...

But na, just a scam innit, and that scam is a definite scam, by definition, it's a scam, so scam? Agreed, scam...

It’s not legally a scam obviously… they are smart
But the aggressive monetization of a game in alpha certainly doesn’t sit right… the “ability” to pay hundreds (or even thousands) of dollars for stuff that may not ever be delivered in one’s lifetime is awfully suspicious… not to mention the inability to get a refund - CIG has very cleverly worded disclaimers - also raises flags…

I use the word “scam” not in the legal sense - I understand it isn’t literally a scam - but in the moral sense.

No game should be asking (and receiving) such enormous amounts of money for something unfinished - especially with no guarantee that it will EVER be finished.

Yet people pay - and will defend CIG so vehemently despite years of false promises and zero guarantees…

 

[Squid Surprise]

Just a little detail. Wing Commander got released only after Chris Roberts was removed. Microsoft took over and released the game.

You mean Freelancer… Chris Roberts released tons of Wing Commander games…

 

[Gezzer]

If SQ succeeds it will be perfect excuse to prolong SC “development” indefinitely.

FYI that's what is actually planned. CR has stated that once it reaches feature complete and is considered a release "1.0" version it won't stop being developed. That it's release will be a soft lunch, and it'll be hard to tell the difference from the alpha/beta being played. It will simply stop having server wipes, but a lot of what was promised will continue to be introduced. Slowly...

Disclosure, I was a heavy backer in the early days, but have since put the game and my expectations on the back burner until it reaches the 1.0 soft launch CR talked about. My feelings on the game are mixed at this point. It's not going to be what was promised, not even close. And some of the ships I "pledged" for are still years (many?) away. Even some of the smaller gameplay aspects/loops won't make release. But it will be a polished playable experience... I hope.

Long term funding might also be a problem. The idea is to support the persistent online portion (servers and such) with an item shop once initial sales at release of both SQ42 and SC peter out. But I question if the vast majority of people who will want to play the final release aren't already backers and won't generate nearly as much operating funds as they think. But considering how much money has come into date I could be wrong too.

In the end I'm cautiously optimistic that my money was well spent and eventually I'll be flying all my ships in the "verse". One problem is I'm turning 65 at the end of March and hope that first off my continually worsening arthritis doesn't make playing too painful. And secondly I don't die from some age related condition in the next 3-4 years. I live in a small community and still know of at least 3 people who died waiting for it to leave alpha. Sad but true.

 

[RaXelliX]

I can only imagine the denier's comments when it finally reaches release.

That after 15 years and nearly a billion dollars they actually managed to produce a small working single player campaign? Great success?

It doesn't matter how good or innovative the game supposedly is. It only exists as a perpetual alpha. The fact that you're allowed to occasionally play this alpha (how magnanimous of them) does not make it a good game.

Bottom line is that as long as they money keeps flowing they have no incentive to release a finished product. The problem is the person at the helm. Chasing perfection, feature creep etc. That is one of the reasons it will never be finished.

Ultimately no company can survive forever by not releasing a product. One day the bill comes due. Always.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Got this from a member you doesn’t want their name attributed to it…. Enjoy

—————

Hi dude,

I do not read or engage much on TechSpot anymore for personal reasons regarding TechSpot double standards freedom of speech. Just that, recently I did my research about Star Citizen too, and so I found TechSpot article, and I think that may be helpful for you too to share my findings in this direct post.

Time to time, there are some posts which claim that Star Citizen is not a scam. And on forums there are many Star Citizen trolls which lie or bring false arguments to defend Chris Roberts CGI company business model. From this point of view, it is easy to prove if Star Citizen is a SCAM or not.

Let's check the definition of SCAM from Merriam-Webster dictionary: SCAM is a fraudulent or deceptive act or operation.
Nota Bene! An operation can be fraudulent or not, but if it is a deceptive act, it is a SCAM even if it is not fraudulent. So, "TECHNICALLY", if any operation is deceptive, it is SCAM. Now, LEGALLY a SCAM can be FRAUDULENT or NOT, but this is just the next phase of a SCAM, though the worst situation is when an operation is both deceptive AND fraudulent, because then it is an unlawful, FRAUDULENT SCAM. From now on, it's enough to check if Star Citizen is a deceptive operation, aka a simple SCAM as defined by dictionary, and how common people understand it.

Next, these are the essential highlighting points which I found about Chris Roberts company CGI and Star Citizen (SC) "business" model as a pattern.

1st point - Chris Robert CGI company lost in court and had to refund initial Star Citizen backers from Kickstarter, who chose to ask a refund. After CGI refused to refund them, they sued CGI because it did not deliver the game as stated in the initial EULA. After that, they sneakily modified SC EULA so that made it more difficult to be sued anymore by those who funded SC on Kickstarter, and almost impossible to be sued by new buyers.

2nd point - Chris Robert company was investigated and found misleading buyers by selling ship "concepts" and, either failed to deliver them in time, or did not deliver them at all. Even in 2025 there are ships "concepts" SOLD during 2012-2015 time period but NEVER RELEASED.
Even worse, UK Advertising Standards Authority confirmed that "Star Citizen" developer's promo email went against the UK Advertising Code of Practice(ASA) for Star Citizen "misleading" content.
In fact, UK customers reported Chris Roberts company CIG sending them promotional emails to BUY new "ships" but there was no mention that those ships does not exist yet in the game and might never exist in game.
After that, Chris Robert company had to change SC EULA - AGAIN - to include a disclaimer warning to any potential customers about the true nature of concept ships.
The most important thing from this investigation was that after that, Chris Robert CIG company had to mention explicit-clearly to customers that buyers do not PURCHASE ships, or other items anymore. Instead, customers pay for a PLEDGE for ships or other items.
CIG marketing emails also had to include this warning.

3rd point - Chris Robert company was sued for copyright infringement and breach of contract by development game studio Crytek, which SC used as game engine (nowadays SC still uses a heavily modified Crytek game engine, Lumberyard, licensed by Amazon from Crytek). To not lose in court and pay fines and damages, Chris Robert company settled and paid Crytek some money before the final verdict.
Crytek accepted because their trial was focused especially for Squadron 42 - SQ42 license, which CGI developed but did not release it, so until the release date, there were no damages to estimate in money. And this is another important reason why CGI completely separated SC game from SQ42, and also delayed SQ42 development and its release. In the past, on their website, you could buy SC+SQ42 together as a discounted offer. Now you cannot "buy" Squadron 42 anymore.
In Techspot forum about this article, Burty117 claimed that CGI won in court against Crytek, because they settled, but he did not provide any proof.
Just that in trial settlements, the party which pay money to the other one is the party which lost, and can be checked that CGI paid Crytek like $2millions. He also claims that "Yeah the moment a word (such as scam) is used in a context that simply doesn't fit, you know they don't understand what the word means." That's why Merriam-Webster dictionary is for, to check the definition for the word SCAM. He did not provide SCAM dictionary definition and did not provide proof that CGI won against Crytek, so he is uninformed, ignorant or rather trolling.

4th point - Chris Robert company bend and exploit some laws which allow gaming companies to pay less taxes or even except them from paying taxes during the development phase of the game.
Now you have the number ONE reason WHY Chris Robert company CGI may delay for more than 13 years to deliver SC as a proper game.
In fact, Chris Robert CGI can intentionally maintain SC in a perpetual alpha state (or beta, gamma, delta) as a loophole just to milk more money from naive or uninformed gamers, and may have no urgent or honest interest to deliver it as a proper, stable game, because after that they would have to pay A LOT MORE TAX MONEY.

5th point - This is "cherry on top" bonus-point: for the new potential naive buyers, check and watch the images with Chris Roberts new yacht which he bought after all these years of Star Citizen PLEDGE funding. Nota BENE, he purchased a real yacht. Chris Robert did not buy it to find out after that he just rented it. And the yacht company did not claim that Chris Roberts made a pledge to buy the yacht, which the yacht company may deliver it or not, as Chris Roberts CGI company is doing for more than 13 years with StarCitizen.

So there you have it, how do you call the difference between a PURCHASE-BUY something, which implies that you own it and a renting or paying for a PLEDGE, and being forced to change EULA because of this? Hint - check SCAM definition.
And here there is another debate about what means in fact to PURCHASE or BUY. Hint - Purchase or BUY is different from paying for a Pledge as digital good or renting, because when you travel in a different country for example, and rent a car, you know it that is not yours, and you do not say I purchase, or I buy a car when renting a car. You say I rent, or I pay for renting a car. Here you can check that California state was among the first who decided to intervene in this controversy and made some laws regarding the difference between a PURCHASE-BUY and/or paying for digital goods or services.
CGI SC company exploited this heavily and deceived many gamers, who expected that they bought a game when in fact they paid for a PLEDGE that SC may be a service delivered as a "game" sometimes in the future. On their old website, when gamers bought SC and SQ42 together, there was a Buy button on their screen, which they had to check to continue to pay screen. Now the entire Star Citizen website is weaselly reskinned as a PLEDGE Store. There is no mention to buy anymore. Just add to cart.

So since 2012 and until 2025, Chris Robert company CGI was, and is still investigated by many country authorities because of lying and misleading Star Citizens (SC) buyers, also lost court trials, and because of this they changed SC EULA many times.
Also, in the past Chris Roberts company was proved many times as being a deceptive operation aka a scam, including few times as being an unlawful, FRAUDULENT SCAM for the first backers, which won in court and were refunded the money.
By changing the EULA (many times), especially after losing in court, Chris Robert company CGI framed themselves into the definition of scam - a fraudulent or deceptive act or operation.
After that, CGI company became more sneaky and due to so many changes CGI company made in their EULA, they are doing their best to not be sued anymore as being a FRAUDULENT SCAM, and made it almost impossible for customers, who choose to sue them, to win in court in 2025 as being a unlawful, fraudulent SCAM.
Anyway, for all readers, and potential SC customers and naive buyers, remember that, regarding Star Citizen you NO LONGER "PURCHASE a GAME", or anything, and in fact Star Citizen is not a game anymore. In 2025, Star Citizen is a SERVICE sneakily disguised as being a game, for which naive buyers just pay CGI company for a PLEDGE towards the development of the Star Citizen as a SERVICE, and or other RSI Services, services which Chris Robert CGI company may fulfill it or NOT with no legal repercussion if they do not deliver it. And CGI company is not obliged with anything to its customers who may realize that by paying for Star Citizen as a PLEDGE, they may be weaselly scammed anytime, just enough to not be possible to be convicted in court anymore.

P.S. I bought Star Citizen+Squadron 42, and some ships, correction, I found out that I did not purchase it at all, I paid for a PLEDGE of an idea that SC would be a game.
And after Chris Roberts company CIG sneakily changed SC EULA, I am clearly and more "objectively" aware now of what a purchase-buy is and what a Star Citizen unfulfilled pledge is, too often and for too long time.
Also, this is how I found out what a repeatedly deceptive (misleading) or not fulfilled financial PLEDGE SCAM is, and what English dictionaries define as being a SCAM.

Wish you happy holidays.