• expired

[PC] Star Citizen - Mustang IAE 2951 Starter Package - US$44.55 @ Robert Space Industries


Robert Space Industries is offering discounts on basic game packages for Star Citizen and Squadron 42. The cheapest package for Star Citizen is approximately $65.00 AUD after conversion.

Unfortunately, I don't know how long these discounts will last.

This is a polarising game/developer, so please keep comments respectful. I would recommend this game to anyone interested in space simulation/roleplay.

I am happy to have a chat with anyone interested in this game as I play quite regularly now. I have also added in the referral links, for anyone that is a current backer.

Referral Links

Referral: random (4)

5,000 UEC (United Earth Credits) for the referee. If the referee buys a Game Package (with minimum value of $40 USD), referrer earns 1 Recruitment Point (RP)

Related Stores

Roberts Space Industries
Roberts Space Industries

closed Comments

  • All packages come with 120 Month Insurance (10 years), meaning your pledge won't disappear when the game fully implements the insurance model.

    I take it this means that in future you can perma-lose ships that are destroyed but that is not the case at the moment?

    • Haven't fully looked into it as im not worried about ship insurance… But RSI have information on insurance and what it means here.

  • +15

    I see the Chris Roberts' welfare program is alive and well in 2021…

  • +26

    Almost a decade in development, a string of broken promises, incomplete, no single player. $400m already sunk into it LOL. The list goes on. When it's more than a tech demo it'll be worth posting here.

    Neg because:

    Issue with product (For example:)
    It does not work the way it should

    Issue with retailer (For example:)
    Previous purchases were not received or the shipping time exceeded what was expected.
    Issues arose which were not rectified in a satisfactory or timely manner.

    • -11

      I was playing today having a blast, if it released right now and was never updated again, I would still pay $60 for that experience… Plus, I really like the development content and showcases.

      But it's not for everyone, as it's not exactly easy to learn.

    • +7

      Agreed, this is an outright scam that would be sad if it wasn't so funny

      • -4

        Haha, this week I've played a good 15 hours of gameplay. No crashes, yes some minor bugs but nothing critical. Played with friends from USA and Europe, shooting ships and killing NPCs. It's not a scam.

        Much more fun than battlefield!

        • +3

          Except I actually have friends playing BF.

          • +1

            @Tacooo: Aww, you can play with me. I'll be your friend :)

        • I wish i could share your enthusiasm.

          I am a current and active player, have been for years.
          A little peak here and there at the progress.

          That said, you can only bounty for so long before it becomes a plain repetitive grind.
          As for other mission types there are few and limited.

          In my opinion if it did stop now it would be still worth a play for a week or so, but it would run out of content quickly.

          So i have to respectfully disagree with your post.

          Been on this merry go round for 8 years or so and it's pretty clear at this point that we're going nowhere.\

          Honestly, yeah it's probably got 100 hours of content in it, but beyond that there isn't much left.

    • +1

      The actual Falcon Heavy rocket that went into space cost a bit over $500M USD according to a few sources. Every relaunch of it costs an additional $50M USD. They could've literally funded 8 relaunches for the cost of this game so far, or contributed a generous chunk of funding to a real rocket being built.

      • i thought roberts pissed away $400 mil?

        • Yeah, 8x relaunches @ $50M = $400M.

          Or they could've funded ~80% of the original rockets design and construction.

  • +17

    Nice one OP, putting "Robert Space Industries" in the title instead of "Star Citizen" so people don't immediately recognise it as the scam that it is.

  • +4

    This game was worth the gamble back when it was $30 USD for both games and about $35 AUD converted.

    Better off just playing free fly weekends at this price.

    • -1

      Totally agree, free fly weekends are a great way to see if you will like this game.

  • +6

    I think it's interesting that people go on about how long Star Citizen has been in development and its a scam etc..

    Then you look at hyped games like Cyberpunk 2077 that had a 9 year development time but flopped because it wasn't ready..

    • I don't want to say it… But yea… You are absolutely right.

      It's almost like game development isn't trivial… And… takes time?? Crazy stuff. lol

  • +5

    Played this, or attempted too, year or so ago. What horrible experience, and the basic learning of how to just do anything was horrible.

    • I found this how to play page very useful.

      I last played in 2015, from then to now is mind-blowing. So much has changed and more gameplay loops are being implemented.

  • +4

    This game will never be finished or released. There's no firm roadmap. It's simply funding someone's pet project & lifestyle.

    Played Squadron 42 on release and it was a joke. May have improved since but not falling for this scam.

    • +1

      'Squadron 42' .. isn't released is it?

      • +1

        It's still under "active development" but they release drips of content over time to keep pulling people's legs and get more sales. When I tried it, it was little more than a tech demo.

        • -1

          So an Alpha?

      • No, it's not released.
        Hybroid must be mixed up with Star Citizen.

  • +5

    Not a deal. At all.

    Got enough crowdfunding for 5 games and they still haven't released a full game yet.

    • -1

      Star Citizen and Squadron 42 development cost is only slightly higher than Cyberpunk 2077. Cyberpunk "released" but was a complete mess and required patches… It's almost like they needed to release the game to make money to continue development. ;)

  • Can't believe it's been 7 years since I backed this game. And 4 years since Squadron 42 was almost ready and just needed a touch more polish.

    I've had some fun with it over the years, but go into this knowing that you're never going to get a complete game. It'll just keep limping along until interest (and money) runs out.

  • +1


    I’m still waiting for my checks email RSI constellation and other assorted stuff.

  • +5

    Goddamn scam and jobs program lol. Plus executive salaries for Roberts and family.

    400million funding and SFA for a proper released product.

    • -2

      I would love to know where all this "it's going to Robert" information is coming from, any sources?

      • The 4 highest level staff are Chris Robers himself, his wife, his brother and his lawyer friend.
        It's crystal clear with a little digging that those 4 are funnelling healthy salaries into their pockets.

        • And another quick search reveals they have 604 staff… I don't get your point?

  • +4

    If you want to play a nice space sim you would be better off playing Elite Dangerous for scale and realism or X4 for a really great single player experience.

    Then you can think about playing Star Citizen in 4-5 years when its campaign is almost ready.

    • I think I read similar comments 5 years ago!

  • Squadron 42 is single player, and still no end in sight for that.

  • +3

    Since this game is still in development, has no roadmap, has no release date, and this money is being used to fund development — doesn't that make this crowdfunding?

    And isn't crowdfunding against the Deal Posting Guidelines?

    • haha, no. the kickstarter for Star Citizen ended in 2012. The roadmap can be found here. Star Citizen Alpha 3.15 is currently available to download and play. However, the game is crowdsourcing its development costs, I will give you that.

      • +2

        Ah. Thanks for the roadmap.

        Still — if the game in alpha (which by definition is not released),
        but they're still taking money for development (which can happen after the Kickstarter),

        and you've conceeded the money is to crowdfund development,
        then the deal is against the posting guidelines.

        • -1

          Hmm, yea. but I guess we need to define "released", would you have considered Cyberpunk or Battlefield to be released, or are they still in development? My point is that many games are "released" but still require active development, patches, expansions, etc. This is just a different development model, one that is working very well.

          • +4

            @TeruMorgan: That's a massive false equivalence.

            The quality of the games is a moot point. Those games were released as final boxed products. Any development is bug fixes, and they're not seeking funding.

            • @bronan: So every dollar from sales is revenue? Interesting…

            • +2

              @bronan: Agreed, @TeruMorgan is comparing quality and maintenance (servers etc) of released titles vs a title that is not even remotely close to release, and has drastically smashed past every bullshit milestone on their present but completely bullshit roadmap without even coming close to honouring any commitment.

              That's just calling it as it is.

              I like the idea of Star Citizen, and i think crowd funding can work for some things, but at some point you have to call it as it is.

              With Roberts burning through funds at an unsustainable rate, refusing the transparency with the funds that was promised and handing over the IP of Sqn42 as collateral for a new loan it's pretty clear that this is being managed badly at best.

              With his family members and close friends holding high paying key roles and with too little to show for the money that has been spent it's completely right to start asking questions.

              Games like Battlefield and Cyberpunk cannot be held as a fair comparison.
              Regardless of their issues they were managed better and have come from nothing to completion and in the case of CyberPunk even been dramatically improved in much less time that it took CIG to build a tech demo.

              • +2

                @virtual81: Well said. And another space game I haven't seen mentioned here is a great example of how to stuff up a launch and actually come through with a quality product in half of the time SC has been a thing for: No Man's Sky - it's brilliant, and hasn't cost a cent more in it's entire life, with continual content additions for free. Had it on PC and bought it on Xbox just to support Hello Games in the way they've handled themselves with it. Very stark contrast to SC.

                • @BoundedRationality: I actually wanted to mention No Mans Sky, but didn't want to go too far off topic.

                  There is a great video on the NMS story here…

                  A small team with a small budget and good morals trumping lack of experience and some industry giants screwing them with pure hard work and determination.
                  It's almost a fairytale how rare things like this are.

                  • @virtual81: Haha, you are all too funny. I guess one day we will see if a similar video comes out about Star Citizen.

                    • +2

                      @TeruMorgan: And if it happens I'll be delighted, but at this point ignoring the media and doing ones own research leads to some seriously concerning conclusions about how backer money is being used.

                      I'm not sitting here online flinging shit at SC just for giggles, I have money invested in it, have had for years.

                      That said I'm a realist, and am not going to be blinded by wishful hype.

                      CIG burning through money
                      Not releasing financials as promised to backers
                      Perpetually being vastly overdue with everything
                      They have a roadmap…. where the road perpetually gets longer
                      Perpetually releasing new ships to generate more funding, but showing near zero progress on the game itself
                      All the high paid positions at CIG held by family members and close friends, rather than more capable and qualified people

                      Taking out a bank loan and using Squadron 42 as the collateral, let me explain this if you don't understand…
                      Imagine you loan a car to a friend and then that friend uses the car as security for a loan and then your friend fails to pay the loan… you lose your car.
                      Sqn42 is paid for by backers and the potential now exists for a bank to take it.

                      Star Citizen cannot be compared with anything that HAS been released until it itself HAS been released.
                      Saying xxx took a long time to develop means nothing when xxx is released and SC is still barely an Alpha.

                      In the real world you can fanboy/girl all you want but little to zero MEANUNGFUL progress is being made.

                      It's amusing reading old forums defending Star Citizen, i stumbled across on the other day where someone like yourself was defending SC and SQN 42 back in 2016 saying that SQN42 was in beta and just being polished and due for release next year (meaning 2017) and Star citizen was not far behind.

                      In a month it will be 2022, so that post suggesting we'd be at the finish line in 2017 is ageing like milk.

                      I'm not a pessimist, not am I an optimist, I call it as it is, i have money in it and have played every patch for many hours each without fail for the last 3 years with the exception of 3.14 as bugs prevented me from spending more than a few hours on it.

                      If you want to refute me then show me some evidence that counters what we know as fact, otherwise continue to drink the koolaid and bury your head in the sand.

                      The direction the game itself is going in is questionable too.
                      I admire the wish to simulate everything, but it's unnecessary and is getting in the way of practical game play.
                      Cockpit HUDs in SC are inferior to current gen fighter jets (I'm a regular DCS player), they need to informational, not overwhelming.
                      They're far too bright, as are the MFDs and other cockpit lights, this has been complained about for years but nothing has been done.
                      Also the loop of play has too much time sink in it with little real content.
                      It can take up to 20 minutes from desktop icon to sitting in a cockpit at places like NewBabbage where you have to use an in game train and 3 elevators to get from your bed to your ship.
                      People commute in real life, they don't want to come home and do the same in a computer game.

                      New Babbage is a city of a million give or take citizens, and only 1 of 20 or so major locations in game, but there are only 50 players to a server.

                      They need to downscale a lot and make the game a collection of more intimate spaces else you risk having a multi-player game where the chances of seeing other players randomly are rare.

                      The removal of Levski was a sad loss, this was my favourite location mainly for it's backstory and scale.
                      I look forward to it returning as they open up the new systems…….. when that ever happens.

                      Suffice to say, I have a good amount of money in the game and a few hundred hours over the years.

                      There are some things nice about the game, the sunrises and sunsets on planets are fantastic, and the amount of freedom one has, going from bed to ship, stopping at shops to buy food and water etc is fantastic, then one can jump in a ship and travel, exit the ship in a suit to repair a satellite and so on… That's all great.

                      But… that's all there is.
                      You can only see the same sunrise so many times, dealing with food / water needs is annoying and poorly implemented and repairing the exact same satellite, shooting the same bounties and running the same errand or mining the same rocks over and over gets tired.
                      So many ships that are essentially useless show pieces, like how will people literally operate ships that need more than 5 crew… you're going to have to have a large group of people with extremely compatible and long periods of free time, yeah, possible, but unlikely to happen regularly.
                      Data running ships have existed for over 6 years… but still no hint at what data running gameplay will look like.

                      Essentially over the last 5 years we got New Babbage and the horrifically annoying to navigate new flagship location 'Orison' the newest addition that is such an annoying place to navigate no one wants to go there. So much for being their new flagship location, "The city in the clouds"!.

                      Essentially being forced onto a planet to muck about with trains and elevators just to go to a mission giver is an exercise in frustration, but the only way SC can force people to visit their 'cities'

                      This is all we've had for years… with nothing new, and more of the same.
                      And they were going to have what… 120 star systems??
                      They haven't even finished one and they are coming toward 10 years overdue.

                      So please… cut the crap with the 'they will show you' kind of posts.
                      It will age poorly like all the other over the last 6 years or so have.

                      At this point I'd legitimately be surprised if they get to a release even vaguely meeting the goals they have stated with the persistent lack of progress, but it would still be welcome.
                      At this point I'm laying money either a non release or them turning the Alpha over to being the actual product with limited content and endless grinding.
                      I'm not getting my hopes up.

                      • @virtual81: First, great post! I don't agree with everything but this does resonate with many people, including myself. I backed this game in 2013 and have followed the development ever since, almost religiously. I still think that people should be more open to experiencing Star Citizen, because my gosh, no other game has even gotten close to the level of amazement that I get every time I log in.

  • Scam Citizen

Login or Join to leave a comment