Why Derek Smart is right about Star Citizen - His facts and why SC is likely to fail

12346»

Comments

  • MrMelGibsonMrMelGibson USAMember EpicPosts: 2,234
    Asm0deus said:
    Kefo said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Teala said:
    It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda.  It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.


    Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
    Why are you concerned about that?  It's not your money, it's their money.  If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens.  But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
    Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
    There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public.  As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.

    The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.

    Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.


    actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product

    However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today. 
    I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means.  If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares.  You are not an investor.  The word you are looking for is donor.
    Well hey, you are right.

    "
    in·ves·tor
    inˈvestər/
    noun
    1. a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
    "

    So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct :) Thanks for the correction

    It's all good.
  • time007time007 Member UncommonPosts: 920
    when its due out again?

    IMPORTANT:  Please keep all replies to my posts about GAMING.  Please no negative or backhanded comments directed at me personally.  If you are going to post a reply that includes how you feel about me, please don't bother replying & just ignore my post instead.  I'm on this forum to talk about GAMING.  Thank you.
    image

  • VrikaVrika FinlandMember RarePosts: 4,128
    edited September 25
    Asm0deus said:
    Kefo said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Teala said:
    It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda.  It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.


    Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
    Why are you concerned about that?  It's not your money, it's their money.  If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens.  But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
    Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
    There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public.  As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.

    The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.

    Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.


    actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product

    However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today. 
    I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means.  If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares.  You are not an investor.  The word you are looking for is donor.
    Well hey, you are right.

    "
    in·ves·tor
    inˈvestər/
    noun
    1. a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
    "

    So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct :) Thanks for the correction

    Donor isn't the right term either.

    Donor is someone who gives away expecting to get no return, or something of only symbolic value in return.


    Since RSI promises people the game, ships in game, etc. in exchange for the money given to them, the correct term is customer.

    "customer
    1.  a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business"
    Post edited by Vrika on
    Octagon7711rpmcmurphy
     
  • barasawabarasawa Eugene, ORMember UncommonPosts: 526
    Just look up the background on Derek Smart. 
    Then decide if it's worth listening to that extremely toxic 'person' even when you find something that seems to backup what he spun. 

    For some reason he's got a hate on for Star Citizen, or maybe Chris Roberts. With DS it's hard to even know if there's a semi-valid reason for it, he is rather like a bouncing bottle of nitro.

    With regards to Chris Roberts, yeah, he's had some problems, and I don't think he's all that good at management, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think this project is sunk, though I sure wish he's set solid milestones and stop with the feature-creep. 

    That's one thing about devs, especially ones really in love with a project. They want to do every cool thing they can think of. That's why a good manager pulls them back from the big jumps and sticks them to the decided up design, and only lets them add a bit that seems to be a good expenditure of resources, assuming you have the resources to expend. 
    Come to think of it, Star Citizen has an INSANE amount of resources to spend on that project. 
    I guess they've got some leeway in how they use it.

    Lost my mind, now trying to lose yours...

  • ThaneThane berlinMember RarePosts: 2,770
    stopped reading after "why derek smart is right"....

    that guy ain't right, never been. as simple.

    "I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"

  • MrMelGibsonMrMelGibson USAMember EpicPosts: 2,234
    Vrika said:
    Asm0deus said:
    Kefo said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Teala said:
    It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda.  It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.


    Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
    Why are you concerned about that?  It's not your money, it's their money.  If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens.  But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
    Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
    There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public.  As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.

    The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.

    Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.


    actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product

    However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today. 
    I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means.  If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares.  You are not an investor.  The word you are looking for is donor.
    Well hey, you are right.

    "
    in·ves·tor
    inˈvestər/
    noun
    1. a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
    "

    So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct :) Thanks for the correction

    Donor isn't the right term either.

    Donor is someone who gives away expecting to get no return, or something of only symbolic value in return.


    Since RSI promises people the game, ships in game, etc. in exchange for the money given to them, the correct term is customer.

    "customer
    1.  a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business"
    What do you call it if the game doesn't launch or launches as a broken mess that is left to rot and no further development?  Or the developer runs with the money?  I would say it's between donor and customer.  After all, there are no guarantees with KS.  How many KS haven't delivered after all.
    MaxBacon
  • Asm0deusAsm0deus BaatorMember RarePosts: 2,000
    edited September 25
    Vrika said:
    Asm0deus said:
    Kefo said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Teala said:
    It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda.  It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.


    Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
    Why are you concerned about that?  It's not your money, it's their money.  If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens.  But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
    Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
    There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public.  As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.

    The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.

    Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.


    actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product

    However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today. 
    I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means.  If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares.  You are not an investor.  The word you are looking for is donor.
    Well hey, you are right.

    "
    in·ves·tor
    inˈvestər/
    noun
    1. a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
    "

    So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct :) Thanks for the correction

    Donor isn't the right term either.

    Donor is someone who gives away expecting to get no return, or something of only symbolic value in return.


    Since RSI promises people the game, ships in game, etc. in exchange for the money given to them, the correct term is customer.

    "customer
    1.  a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business"
    Now that we got the idea that we are not investors..... I would say the proper terms are pledge and backer.

    We pledge money without expecting any financial returns, but do "hope" the game will eventually be made and we may then benefit from some "backer" rewards.

    Seems silly to go round and round the idea of using the proper words but if we use the correct terms and understand them we then can have a better mindset of what we can expect or not expect from give money to a KS campaign.
    Post edited by Asm0deus on

    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

    case: Coolermaster HAF932
    PSU: Antec EA 750watt
    RAM: 4x2g G-SKILL DDR3-1600mhz 9-9-9-24
    Mb:Gigabyte GA-P55-UD4P
    CPU: i5-750 @4ghz
    GPU: gtx msi N760 TF 2GD5/OC
    cooling: Noctua NH-D14
    storage: seagate 600 240GB SSD, 500GB x7200rpm HDD


  • KefoKefo London, ONMember EpicPosts: 3,014
    Asm0deus said:
    Kefo said:
    ...snip....
    I'm not sure how many times I have to say I'm not asking them to open the books before you understand that. It's really not that hard though for the most open game dev ever! to tell backers how the money is being used. Does that mean opening the books? No. Does that mean posting a cost breakdown of everything used in the office? No. Shit I'd be curious just to know what they spend on plane tickets flying back and forth between studios(and associated costs) when maybe no one has told CR what skype is?

    And I've never argued about being an investor or not since I know how KS works and yeah the most you can do is ask for a refund which many would probably do or never have pledged in the first place if they knew what kind of waste of money CIG might be doing.

    That wasn't my point about how much CR pays his employees but if he's paying his brother half a million a year to run 1 studio you should be stopping and asking yourself what kind of ridiculous salary he's paying himself and wife. And no I'm not saying he should be taking no salary but perhaps something a little more modest until they don't have to rely on presales of a game that isn't anywhere near complete.



    I'm not sure how many times I have to say I'm not asking them to open the books
    Really? Yet here you ask them,
    to tell backers how the money is being used
    which is essentially opening the books. That's what this term means.  You are asking them to show the inner workings of the company even if you're not after a complete breakdown.

     They are using the money to build the game.. What! Do you expect them to answer you saying they're using it on hoes n blow?
    It's amazing how you can make anything fit your argument when you take something said out of context eh? You want to have a real debate with me then don't selectively quote me. I like the way you word things and out back and forth so far but your last argument was weak and you know it.
    Asm0deus
  • KefoKefo London, ONMember EpicPosts: 3,014
    Asm0deus said:
    Vrika said:
    Asm0deus said:
    Kefo said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Teala said:
    It's crap post like the one the OP has started that has pretty much kept me away from MMORPG.com - this post does nothing but promote Derek Smart and his agenda.  It serves no other purpose and one other little truth - DS has predicted the SC failing almost since day one - guess what OP SC is still on track and getting made and the game development has not collapsed yet.


    Uhm, technically speaking, SC is NOT on track, but that doesn't even concern me. I'm more concerned about what they spend their money on.
    Why are you concerned about that?  It's not your money, it's their money.  If the game fails to be completed, then it makes sense to criticize expenditures after that happens.  But while the game is still being made, sticking our nose in their business is about as useful as pissing in the wind.
    Yeah why should the backers want accountability with the money they are giving CR, who has failed at running a game studio in the past? Better to ask questions when it's too late right?
    There a difference between accountability and wanting them to open their books to the public.  As much as I hate some of the thing CIG has done they have shown enough "accountability", via progress on the game, that you or even KS can't do anything or claim scam etc etc.

    The game is being made, its showing progress.. maybe not how you or I would like but then that a risk we take when we "give" our money away in a KS funded project.

    Bottom line is we didn't invest anything and we are not investors thus we have zero right to "see their books" as most people screaming for "accountability" really want.


    actually, for those donating to kickstarters, they ARE investors. They are investing into a game or product, similar to when the company seeks outside funding to publish/help fund a game/product

    However, buying ships does not make one an investor but someone just buying a ship like buying a cash shop product. But for those who donated to Star Citizen's Kickstarter, they are all investors. Without that money, Star Citizen would be very different today. 
    I don't think you understand what the word "investor" actually means.  If there is no return as in you are not getting money back stock shares.  You are not an investor.  The word you are looking for is donor.
    Well hey, you are right.

    "
    in·ves·tor
    inˈvestər/
    noun
    1. a person or organization that puts money into financial schemes, property, etc. with the expectation of achieving a profit.
    "

    So the correct word is Donor. So everyone is donating to help fund the game, but no one will get profits out of it that have put money in. So you are correct :) Thanks for the correction

    Donor isn't the right term either.

    Donor is someone who gives away expecting to get no return, or something of only symbolic value in return.


    Since RSI promises people the game, ships in game, etc. in exchange for the money given to them, the correct term is customer.

    "customer
    1.  a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business"
    Now that we got the idea that we are not investors..... I would say the proper terms are pledge and backer.

    We pledge money without expecting any financial returns, but do "hope" the game will eventually be made and we may then benefit from some "backer" rewards.

    Seems silly to go round and round the idea of using the proper words but if we use the correct terms and understand them we then can have a better mindset of what we can expect or not expect from give money to a KS campaign.
    This stopped being a KS campaign when they switched to selling ships and game packages on their website. As soon as that took over from the end date of the KS campaign everyone after that point was a customer. Not a donor or someone who pledged but a customer. This is why CIG still has to give refunds because they know their TOS would never hold up to consumer protection laws if they tried to fight it.
  • DaranarDaranar Walkersville, MDMember UncommonPosts: 222
    Did you even bother trying to get a refund before doing a charge back?

    As for my thoughts on DS, he's a failed game dev.. thats pretty much it. He has about as much relevance as the crap i scooped out of the litter box this morning.

    If SC ever gets finished I'll give it a try, just like I do with any game that interests me regardless what some randoms on the internet are saying about it. 
    I did actually. I tried a few months ago, don't have email anymore but they refused because they said I paid for the game too long ago (I paid into it back in December when they had a bunch of sales/deals going on). I just told my bank I didn't see I paid for it and got them to get my money back.
    Guy complains about scams and lies, then scams/lies to his bank to charge back on old charge he knowingly made.  Yeah, grrrr, darn those low life devs who lie about their financial doings.  They should be more honest and responsible with their money like you, huh?

    This guy...
    RexKushman

    If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!

    FREE Mobile Puzzle Game.  Simon Said What?  https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.BGM.SimonSaidWhat

  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy DublinMember RarePosts: 2,506
    edited September 25
    Asm0deus said:
    Now that we got the idea that we are not investors..... I would say the proper terms are pledge and backer.

    We pledge money without expecting any financial returns, but do "hope" the game will eventually be made and we may then benefit from some "backer" rewards.

    Seems silly to go round and round the idea of using the proper words but if we use the correct terms and understand them we then can have a better mindset of what we can expect or not expect from give money to a KS campaign.

    I saw a good piece about this the other day that essentially said the term pledge only works on Kickstarter because you are agreeing to pay up if the funding goal crosses its target, you're not making a payment before that happens.

    After kickstarter everything is a sale, and everybody is a customer, because they take the money from you straightaway, in fact the only people making pledges are CR / CIG. They are the ones saying that if you give them money now they promise to deliver item X at a later date.

    Post edited by rpmcmurphy on
    Kefo
  • Asm0deusAsm0deus BaatorMember RarePosts: 2,000
    edited September 25
    Asm0deus said:
    Now that we got the idea that we are not investors..... I would say the proper terms are pledge and backer.

    We pledge money without expecting any financial returns, but do "hope" the game will eventually be made and we may then benefit from some "backer" rewards.

    Seems silly to go round and round the idea of using the proper words but if we use the correct terms and understand them we then can have a better mindset of what we can expect or not expect from give money to a KS campaign.

    I saw a good piece about this the other day that essentially said the term pledge only works on Kickstarter because you are agreeing to pay up if the funding goal crosses its target, you're not making a payment before that happens.

    After kickstarter everything is a sale, and everybody is a customer, because they take the money from you straightaway, in fact the only people making pledges are CR / CIG. They are the ones saying that if you give them money now they promise to deliver item X at a later date.

    Well it's a good thing I was talking about kickstarters then isn't? 

    Oh look Kefo I even mention KS campaign in that last line of the sentence of the quote of me on your post!

     
    Anyways I'm not going to keep going round n round with you guys as it's simple enough to know what to expect with KS like this especially if you hang out in here at mmorpg as much as you guys do.

    Have a :cookie:  everyone!
    Post edited by Asm0deus on

    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.

    case: Coolermaster HAF932
    PSU: Antec EA 750watt
    RAM: 4x2g G-SKILL DDR3-1600mhz 9-9-9-24
    Mb:Gigabyte GA-P55-UD4P
    CPU: i5-750 @4ghz
    GPU: gtx msi N760 TF 2GD5/OC
    cooling: Noctua NH-D14
    storage: seagate 600 240GB SSD, 500GB x7200rpm HDD


  • KefoKefo London, ONMember EpicPosts: 3,014
    Asm0deus said:
    Asm0deus said:
    Now that we got the idea that we are not investors..... I would say the proper terms are pledge and backer.

    We pledge money without expecting any financial returns, but do "hope" the game will eventually be made and we may then benefit from some "backer" rewards.

    Seems silly to go round and round the idea of using the proper words but if we use the correct terms and understand them we then can have a better mindset of what we can expect or not expect from give money to a KS campaign.

    I saw a good piece about this the other day that essentially said the term pledge only works on Kickstarter because you are agreeing to pay up if the funding goal crosses its target, you're not making a payment before that happens.

    After kickstarter everything is a sale, and everybody is a customer, because they take the money from you straightaway, in fact the only people making pledges are CR / CIG. They are the ones saying that if you give them money now they promise to deliver item X at a later date.

    Well it's a good thing I was talking about kickstarters then isn't? 

    Oh look Kefo I even mention KS campaign in that last line of the sentence of the quote of me on your post!

     
    Anyways I'm not going to keep going round n round with you guys as it's simple enough to know what to expect with KS like this especially if you hang out in here at mmorpg as much as you guys do.

    Have a :cookie:  everyone!
    Yep and I agree with you that they are backers during the campaign but after the campaign they are customers. Don't start throwing a little tantrum because you don't like what people say even if they are agreeing with you but expanding upon your point.
    Asm0deusScotchUp
  • RingLdr77RingLdr77 Member CommonPosts: 8
    All I want to know is when the game will be out, released, and amazing. That way we can talk about what is and isn't and not how it will get there.
  • mgilbrtsnmgilbrtsn belleville, ILMember RarePosts: 3,034
    This is actually a good news story.  By moving to a 'Its gonna fail' phase, we've moved away from the 'Its never gonna happen' phase.  Congrats SC, for moving from vaporware to failure before launch.
    ScotchUp

    Concentrate on enjoying yourself, and not on why I shouldn't enjoy myself.

Sign In or Register to comment.