Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Star Citizen hits 58 million $ in crowdfunding
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
ESO cost $200 million dollars and its basically a medium piece of shit, SC for $50? no way...
So it's all good then, the game will get made and they will have their profit. That's if the game gets done in 2-3 years. If it takes 5-6 years like you say, there probably won't be any profit left.
200 devs over 5 years .. that alone probably cost more than what they got in funding so far.
Here's a magic to you that you did not thought about... .
Contracts. Partners.
People hired to work in demand, to deliver something (in case of SC, something very specific for a period of a time when the pressure is becoming higher). People that do not work along all this time that you mentioned and because that, are not paid all the time for the client: CIG (that just pay for a price closed, a very small one, actually, not for the salaries of those people). And they are the huge majority between the SC team, that keeps very few in their own staff.
Pure magic.
Funny that you mentioned other games (with other costs involved than CR does not have), while ignoring the own word of the CEO of Cloud Imperium Games, about his own project.
Nothing to gain? Millions of dollars continuously earned through the hands of overhyped people that definitely thinks or presume that are investing in a "massive popular success" and "helping to make it more popular" (and been fed by CIG with the 'vibe of the eternal success'... 'oh, look to the publishers... all in fear'... 'oh, look, new 10k phantoms' hehehehehe) is nothing to gain?
And what about the free press? At least in their perspective, apparently it seems great for them, the kind of press that they got.
Definitely is not.
Still, they think, wrongly, that it is (for some reasons that they already let people knowing about their line of thinking that its totally unhappy and they will see that in time... or maybe never... maybe they will just like his fans, to live in denial and associate a lack of popularity or a bad trend of growing as more "things are released", as something else).
In any case, they have strong reasons for that. So, you started to fail to see, even this. How possibly you have any chance to see the rest.
Let's not forget that non-publisher funding was touted as 4 or 5:1 thus they have raised atleast $236 million at this point.
But more money really doesn't automatically make things better, if the primary method of player input is crap then throwing more money at it is not going to help, all the avatar based MMOs commonly percieved as 'clunky' are a simple testament to this.
what is this non-publisher funding you are talking about? I thought the total total was 50 million.
I have no dispute that indie companies can produce MUCH better games and for far less money than firms controlled by a publisher or investment company HOWEVER, that doesnt mean they can make a Porche for $5 there is a point where the difference is silly and not workable.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
#IStandWithVic
Different people, different contracts, different companies, different timeline, different costs. It's not like making "pretty graphics" were some kind of hidden formula as making a Porche. Even some fans of SC would be able to prove you some of that.
A trainee in a thirdy party, working on demand, does not cost the same than a experienced professional, member of staff.
With no schedule, with no compromise, both can deliver the same "high quality" stuff that they propose VISUALLY. It does not matter if they will be much less effective or leading to tons and tons of rework or even a bad result in the end, when you are making money before regardless, and people are ok with you missing all your deadlines or presenting the same schedule, for the next year, that you already presented an year before, after a whole year and a half passed (as all this time simply did not exist), and people simply do not notice that, because they are too focused in that "fancy" video that you made and presented just before to present such schedule.
Better if you have a community that do not demand effectiveness. Or that accepts that you say that "has no compromise" after you made, for the general public, a very clear one before. Better if you have weekly shows or marketing and letters, to say repeatedly that "more time means something better", while you hold the more meaningful stuff for a long time to show, making you thirsty enough, so when you show anything, or deliver something, even that its a microscopic thing in terms of what was usually promised for the same period, such thing appears as "oh! look how advanced we are".
Reasons to spend more money in professionals that actually could lead you to better stuff... zero. Just hire a few and that's it. Even better when the majority of them are your friends that were not exactly in the best moment of their careers (they will cost less... talk to them about the "challenge" instead money).
Besides that, let's just get trainees and train them all. Who cares that will take more time. We write some vague letters, show a couple of these guys in the shows making interviews, etc. and voilá. Everyone presumes that all 300 "employees" work all the time and are all experienced people.
Look how smart we are, saving all this profit! Why to spend money. We have all the time that we need, a "good" set of excuses to give and actually, our people pay more for limited-draw-ships, than limited-implemented-ships. As more not effective we are, more money we will make. Isn't obvious? (I just remembered of one of their "newbie" employees saying in one interview that "they asked him to make the things more slow", heh)
Just ... damn not even worth my time, live happy in your own fantasy.
I don't blame you. Definitely the real world would sound like a phantasy for those who live in Wonderland.
like I said, I totally agree that an indie staff can make a better game for less than the AAA devs do but there is a point where the cost is just not possible
Given that 50million cant even make a single player AAA game I think they are far over what they can do for that much.
Also keep in mind that for every hour I as a developer sit behind a computer making a game I am going to want to get paid. The longer a game takes to make the more you will have to pay me
Which makes no difference if you "hour" is 10 times less the hour of another more capable person for the cost... again, if time is not an issue, unless it takes absurd 10 times more time, you will end saving profit here, probably. Why to get more capable people to do the job, right?
And about your assumption of SP games that cannot be done with 50 million, to have an "AAA" quality... wrong. Just wrong.
CR himself, promised to make 1 that would cost not even 1/4 of 20-23, by the way.
And there are plenty of examples out there.
Its actually the huge minority of the games, even with high quality level, that goes to the level of "Titanic" expenses, mainly when talking about single-player (or coop) only.
I have no dispute that you can be more productive for less time however that still doesnt remove the fact that more time costs more money and it doesnt remove the fact that there is only so much you can do even if you are the best of the best.
Could they have made this for $25? $75? $175. no
so where is the marker. My suggestion is that given the scope I think $50 million is not enough.
Roberts has always maintained that $1 from the crowdfunding model is worth more than $4 from an investor/publisher model.
https://i.imgur.com/cbs3aHj.jpg
Seriously. "Time costs more money"... Until what point you will continue to use this generic line of thinking that is simply wrong.
You pay 1 dollar/hour for a person, a newbie, that will take 10 hours to make something (considering the learning time, rework caused by lack of experience, etc). You spent 10 dollars, right?
You pay 5 dollar/hour for a person that is much more effective and will take 5 hours to make that same something. You spent how much?
Can you see now? What is your choice if "time is not an issue"?
And better than that. What is your choice if besides the time not been an issue, if you take more time to achieve your "end" target, if you be less effective, you win more money?
as someone who has worked on projects of various kinds in business for more than 20 years I can tell you that you are only PART right.
A really good developer who can out develop the average developer DOES get more done per hour. No question.
HOWEVER...if you base your estimates to get XYZ done in X time the estimate is based on those on your team. development projects are 100% tied to time. More over, you seem to be suggesting the project can be done FOR FREE
for the 4th time I am not disputing that a team can be more efficient then a baseline however THERE IS A LIMIT. if there was not a limit then you could do the project for zero dollars.
In all your experience I am pretty sure that "time" was an issue. For this project it's not (at least in their view and how they try to convince people... I think that they are wrong).
I am not "half" right. I am totally right. You are looking into that under a perspective of someone "focused to deliver". You are failing to see that it's seriously bad for their business at the moment (again, according with their line of thinking, that I am sure that is totally wrong and will lead them more quickly to a fail) to achieve "more effectively/earlier" that "end" target.
No. The project cannot be done for free. I did not say that.
There is a limit indeed. In practice what would take 3 or 4 will take 6. Not a big deal, again, when the people supporting them is ok with 6 (ignoring that they could get on 3 or 4 and are giving more money, that actually has not been spent and won't be - until they start to demand more - even if takes twice the time calculated earlier, because the money spend for the majority of the employees is 1, not 5 dollars-hour, if you know what I mean, and I tried to show you in that example).
focused to deliver has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
none...zippo.
sorry i give up trying to explain
Played-Everything
Playing-LoL
as much vaporware as EQ Next, Black Desert, the Divison or any other game in developmemt.
they show stuff every week, they already run a live online multiplayer game, so, are you lying, trolling or both? Very funny though. Ha ha.
I have a feeling when all is said and done this game is going to go down as the greatest hustle/scam of gaming crowd funding of alltime. I mean lets be honest, all this money has been thrown at the game and what we have seen/played thus far really does not justify this insane budget.
Aloha Mr Hand !