Star Citizen: Difference between revisions

{{Incomplete|Issue 1=Insufficient references and in-text citations.|Issue 2=Impromper formatting of references.}}{{Tone}}

|Logo=Star citizen logo.png

'''[[Wikipedia:Star Citizen|Star Citizen]]''' is a crowdfunded space station simulator game. Star Citizen combines features from space simulators, first-person shooters, and massively multiplayer online genres across its four playable modes. These modes, known as modules, offer distinct player experiences.

*Idris-M: Military variant sold in 2012 for $1,000, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-M ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260202174221/https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-M Archived])</ref>

*Idris-P: Civilian variant sold since 2012 for $1,250, price increased to $1,500, incomplete version delivered May 2025.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-P ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251220101204/https://starcitizen.tools/Idris-P Archived])</ref>

*Banu Merchantman | Merchantman: First sold in 2013 for $250 (original concept sale); currently priced at $600.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Merchantman ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251219235610/https://starcitizen.tools/Merchantman Archived])</ref>

*Orion: First sold in 2014 for $325 (original concept sale), the industrial mining vessel remains undelivered; current price is $575.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Orion ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260128224132/https://starcitizen.tools/Orion Archived])</ref>

*Genesis Starliner: Sold in 2015 for $400 (original concept sale), passenger transport remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251112221548/https://starcitizen.tools/Genesis_Starliner Archived])</ref>

*Endeavor: Made available in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), with limited availability due to price increases.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Endeavor</ref>

*Hull D: Sold since 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), price increased in subsequent sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251213110038/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_D Archived])</ref>

*Hull E: Offered in 2015 for $550 (original concept sale), increased to $950 in later sales.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260219233750/https://starcitizen.tools/Hull_E Archived])</ref>

*Crucible: Sold in 2015 for $350 (original concept sale), repair ship remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Crucible ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260117044445/https://starcitizen.tools/Crucible Archived])</ref>

*Pioneer: Marketed in 2017 for $850 (original concept sale), base-building vessel remains in concept phase<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Pioneer ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260125190110/https://starcitizen.tools/Pioneer Archived])</ref>

*Drake Kraken: First sold in 2018 for $1,400 (original concept sale), capital ship with privateer variant sold for $2,000, remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Kraken ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251112222501/https://starcitizen.tools/Kraken Archived])</ref>

*Railen: First sold in 2021 for $200 (original concept sale), remains undelivered.<ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Railen ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251129082032/https://starcitizen.tools/Railen Archived])</ref>

[[File:ASA Response .png|thumb|A response letter from the Advertising Standards Authority affirming that Cloud Imperium Games likely had breached the Advertising Rules. ]]

In 2021, following a consumer complaint to the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) by a member of the /r/starcitizen_refunds community, Cloud Imperium Games was required to modify its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined that they violated UK advertising rules<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20210831222423/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/pfgchs/uk_advertising_standards_agency_rule_concept_ship/ Archived])</ref>, Cloud Imperium Games was needed to alter its concept ship marketing emails after the ASA determined they violated Advertising Rules in the UK. The issue centered on emails promoting concept ships without clear disclosure that the advertised vessels did not yet exist in the game. In response, CIG added a standardized disclaimer to their marketing emails stating that concept ships are "being offered here as a limited vehicle concept pledge". The disclaimer also notes that purchasers receive a temporary "loaner vehicle" until their bought ship becomes available.

Squadron 42's "Answer the Call 2017" marketing campaign ultimately failed when CIG failed to deliver the promised single-player campaign, despite extensive marketing featuring a star-studded cast, including Mark Hamill, Gary Oldman, and Gillian Anderson. <ref>https://starcitizen.tools/Squadron_42 ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260221031725/https://starcitizen.tools/Squadron_42 Archived])</ref> Following community backlash over the missed release, CIG announced plans for a new project roadmap in late 2017. However, this evolved into what became known as the "Roadmap to the Roadmap," with a release view being finally available in March of 2018. When finally delivered, the new roadmap consistently showed missed deadlines and delayed features. Rather than address these delays, CIG ultimately discontinued much of the roadmap's progress tracker in February 2022, dismissively labeling concerned backers as "roadmap watchers" <ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/roadmap-roundup-february-2nd-2022 ([http://web.archive.org/web/20250814053537/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/roadmap-roundup-february-2nd-2022 Archived])</ref> and claiming that showing development progress "puts too much attention on features that had a high probability of shifting around" and was "a distraction both internally at CIG and within the community". This marked a significant departure from their previous promises of transparency and was met with substantial community backlash, particularly from backers who had used the roadmap to track progress on features they had purchased years earlier.

The prolonged development timeline and sales practices have led to organized consumer response movements, notably the /r/starcitizen_refunds subreddit community, which has over 18,000 members.<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20250803112513/https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/ Archived])</ref>. This subreddit serves as a platform for dissatisfied backers seeking refunds, documenting development delays, and tracking changes to terms of service that affect consumer rights. Discussion of these issues on official channels is heavily restricted, with CIG's Spectrum forum rules explicitly prohibiting posts deemed to spread "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" (FUD)<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/115013196427-Spectrum-and-Website-Rules-and-Moderation-Responsibilities ([http://web.archive.org/web/20250714211323/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/115013196427-Spectrum-and-Website-Rules-and-Moderation-Responsibilities Archived])</ref> and the discussion of support tickets/moderation decisions.  

[[File:Example of Exessive Griefing .png|thumb|An example of a user being banned for the term 'Excessive Griefing' and being directed to review the terms of service and rules of conduct for a term that doesn't exist. ]]

The moderation practices of Cloud Imperium have drawn criticism for inconsistent and opaque enforcement. Users can receive bans for "excessive griefing" despite this term having no defined parameters in either the Terms of Service<ref>https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos ([http://web.archive.org/web/20260204133014/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/tos Archived])</ref> or Rules of Conduct<ref>https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251023231231/https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409491235351-Rules-of-Conduct Archived])</ref> documentation. Users receive these bans without stated reasons, requiring them to file support tickets to learn of their alleged infractions. This lack of transparency and disconnect between written policies and enforcement has created significant uncertainty about what constitutes acceptable behavior.  

Star Citizen's Persistent Universe, or PU for short, is an open sandbox that allows players to engage in PVP activities such as Piracy and Bounty Hunting, yet participating in these activities could lead a player to being banned for 'excessively' engaging in this activity under the guise of it being 'harassment' to do so.  

On April 21, 2025, Cloud Imperium Games banned player HuskyPie for 17 days after German content creator Karolinger falsely accused him of stream sniping. The incident occurred in Pyro, a lawless system explicitly for PvP combat. HuskyPie was completing a mercenary mission when he encountered and killed Karolinger twice at Bueno Ravine. Despite having no evidence beyond the streamer's accusations, CIG suspended HuskyPie's account. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0eipkl66-8 As documented in an episode of the "Griefers Pub" podcast], HuskyPie was forced to appeal by providing his own game logs, which proved he was already at the location on mission objectives and had never watched Karolinger's stream. CIG eventually overturned the ban but offered no apology or explanation for its actions. This case directly demonstrates preferential treatment for content creators. It shows how regular players can be banned for engaging in permitted gameplay while content creators receive special protection from legitimate game mechanics.