Is this Anti SC?

No. StarCitizen Tracker is an attempt to organize and visualize expected game features and development promises. It has a skeptical stance towards claims of progress that cannot be substantiated or re-produced in the live alpha. The reason for this is often game trailers or presentations do not match the playable experience.

Who maintains this?

You! Please use the 'Update' and 'New' buttons above. These short forms submit information to a small team of editors. Everyone has their own biases it's true; but while working on the tracker, we put on our agnostic hat and allow the company to succeed or fail by their own merit. We are not here to make anyone look good or bad. We organize information.



Anything said or written that could reasonably or likely cause an expectation to be set.


"We've already announced that we're gonna be supporting TrackIR, so that's definitely on our list."

Expected Slam dunk, officially saying a feature will be included.

"I think we'd let people design their own costumes for their characters."

Expected Did not explicitly say it would be included, yet the expectation was set that they would let players do [x].

"The idea is you'll start in the hangar and then you'll equip your ship, and you can even chat with friends and organizations in the hangar, say 'Hey all, let's get into a battle.'"

Expected Sets the expectation by telling the customer to imagine it working this way in the final product. Slam dunk in our opinion but doesn't adhere to a strict interpretation of a promise.

"Our plan is that we're gonna have regular content updates, maybe not weekly, but hopefully at least bi-monthly, as we go, but then we'll also have some much bigger content updates which would be, say another single player campaign like Squadron 42, or the ability to play one of the alien races."

Expected Planned to be in game, but includes a disclaimer. Nevertheless the expectation has been set.

"We're also, I think it would be interesting to explore it on a multiple monitor situation. Although when I've talked about this, to be sure, this won't be functional in the dogfighting, and it's a longer term goal for the game."

Expected Saying 'long term' still sets the expectation that it will be included.

"So we haven't really thought it out. [...] I'm not quite sure about that, but probably the likelihood is support for iOS and Android."

Editor disgression Said they haven't spent any time on it is entirely possible that something like this could set players expectations.

"Not sure about renting out ships, I mean we've discussed it, so that's definitely something that we're going to investigate."

Editor disgression Covered on both sides with disclaimers but did say they would look into it. The editor will need to decide if the statement could cause an expectation to be set in a portion of listeners or readers. In these cases the tone of how it was said may also play into the determination.

"We've considered it, we're not 100% sure about doing it, though the system supports it as each thruster is physically modelled correctly and supplies thrust individually. So, I would say that would be something that we'd consider, as it's not too hard, but no promises."

Not Promised Littered with disclaimers. We don't think anyone would read this and expect it to be included.


Fairly self explanatory. Was the promise delivered for the most part? Best is if it is still working or accessible.


Delivered in some form but doesn't quite match the original expectation set in the promise. Also covers items are are Completed but then removed or degraded to the point they don't qualify as Completed anymore. Delivered but degraded from the original expectation the point it becomes questionable.

In alpha:

Best is if customers can currently access it. Features that are starting to work in the alpha version. Things that appear on AtV or promo videos do not necessarily qualify and are left to editor discretion. In addition, StarCitizen Tracker takes a skeptical stance towards internal builds because without interacting with the feature for ourself, we do not know for sure if something is pre-rendered or otherwise staged in a non-game tool.

We are seeing some promises disputed because there is a 3D model for some aspect of a feature. We will not be labeling all NPC promises In alpha just because there is an asset for them. In that respect, a feature should be at least 25% complete and testable in the alpha for it to be considered.

Sadly our current focus prevents us from keeping these items super accurate. We are primarily focused on adding promises to the catalog and determining if they are Completed and working or not. With over 300 promises in the list, we do not currently have enough editors to scrutinize the current progress made on each item. Your submissions are invaluable in this regard.

Not implemented:

This is the default. Submit sources if there are grounds to suggest otherwise. Features that appear in trailers, promotion material, and the RSI website that are otherwise not yet implemented in the downloadable game.


We attach a date to every item, if more than a 3 years have passed without testable progress, the expectation will automatically be labeled ‘Stagnant’


Editor discretion. We may label an expectation as ‘Broken’ if we have sufficient consensus or grounds to believe it has been tarnished, ignored, delayed indefinitely, forgotten, or for any other reason lead to believe it will not be delivered. If you have a source to challenge a promise labeled as ‘Broken’, please submit it.

Because Cloud Imperium Games Corporation calls all of its products a work in progress, we sometimes see it disputed that a promise has not been broken because it is still being worked on. We are happy to re-label items as they become available to alpha testers and will highlight any recategorized expectation via twitter.