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
[mod edit]
nothing to show
http://youtu.be/hazwN_PerRs
vaporware
http://youtu.be/THmfLOdT3qE
scam
http://youtu.be/DgNK_wpuPn4
not a multiplayer game
http://youtu.be/qL1RXbZLHAI
will never be released
http://youtu.be/o-xvCg8CI9U
no real physics
http://youtu.be/cjkadFolE6o
making nothing else but ships
http://youtu.be/s6evCub1cVA
[mod edit]
You cannot compare, since in all these cases, you won't pay years earlier and you have along all the road, your experience hampared in-game (unless you pay more money).
For the sake of a deal (and law), there is not problem to delay indefinitely a game that you did not pay for. That's not the same case of when you already got the money.
There is no reason (valuable reason) that makes a development team to respect "publisher" when that is the case, and disrespecting people, just because they are clueless and more easy to deceive with whatever "pretty letter", that from the ears of a serious business man, would sound like a joke.
Do not confuse trolish with facts. If the facts are not so good as you imagine, you should complain with the development team, not complain of those who raises such facts, and if are pissed of, are for good and fair reasons.
Your "videos" just shown something very far from this, which is signed not by any naysayer/troll or whatever other term that you use to offend customers... but by Chris Roberts:
"
Funded! This project was successfully funded on November 19, 2012.
The people who pledge for their spaceships will get to test-fly them long before the general public. 12 months in, we will allow the early backers to play the multiplayer space combat Alpha, and then 20-22 months in they will get to play the Star Citizen Beta, adventuring around the huge open galaxy, well before the general public.
"
And the reality of the project shows something absolutely contrary to what was said here:
"Can you explain the stretch goals?
The purpose of the higher stretch goals is to ensure that the game-as-described is finished in the two year time period.
"
It's curious how they are approaching to such "new million mark". Curiously because they put on sale something less expensive recently, I guess that those usual 5k in average are not really making a difference so quickly. But put a 600 dollar offer and they make miracles in a matter of a day
LoL
Wow, so a bunch of scripted, non-gameplay videos under two minutes each (a couple pre-rendered, at that) and footage from an extremely basic dogfighting module 'prove' this isn't vaporware.
The average game on Kickstarter has more to show than this. 59 million dollars, several years, and this is it. This pathetic sampling of videos is the best you can do to defend your precious game.
That's just sad, man.
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
Games that gather that amount of money from publishers or investors have to proof a lot more than what you just posted AND get a lot more flak from the public when they pull stunts like selling concept art for hundreds of dollars (frankly I don't even know any games that dared to do that before).
If it turns out great, then fine, even though people would still have spent way too much for digital content IMO and have worked towards a negative trend.
But it's about time they consolidate their efforts. Asking for more and more is not encouraging at all. Everyone who ever had to make a creative work knows that at a certain stage you have to cut the knot and start finalizing your ideas, or risk getting nowhere at all.
This thing is literally getting to big to fail now, imo.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Heh!
Last year CR told that would release in the end of 2013 the Alpha Multiplayer, and 2014 would come Planeside Module, FPS, Squadron 42 and PU Alpha by the end of 2014/start of 2015.
This year, now, in the end of the year, he presented a new schedule:
- By the end of 2014, SC 1.0 (which still is not the Alpha originally promised on Kickstarter, since it is missing the multi-seat ships);
- And in 2015, FPS, Planesite, AC 2.0 (this one would fill that promise of an Alpha that should be released on Nov/2013), just the first chapters of Squadron 42, and a possible evolution of Planetside to something like a PU pre-pre-alpha by the end of the year probably.
Now, look again, read again what as promised for 2013/2014 and what was promised for 2014/2015. Seriously, just pay attention and you will se that the only difference here, for real, is on the change of the years, and some new labels for modules that before was called Alpha and became AC.
Still, after a long delay of the AC 1.0, to be launched as AC 0.8 originally, it was hyped that probably by the end of 2014 people would get their hands on AC 3.0 (it does not appear not even in 2015).
Squadron 42, was hyped to have 10 chapters by package, startintg the release next year and ending next year, having about one month of nothing between each launch. Now, CR says that will release just one chapter and a space of at least 3 months between each new chapter
LoL
P.S: 300 employees working fully focused along almost 1.5 or 2 years, in paralel, right? Riiight? Hehehehehe! Some people simply choose to be blind. Should I mention about the updates in their website and how long that has been taken? You know. Some "sections" where announced to be "almost ready" almost 2 years ago. And they reported "actions" after "actions" along all these years of things that those people have been doing. And in the end, they did not make, basically nothing and take longer than students in a garage to update their website, still depending of new "stretch goals" to see what they are going to do "first", after so long time, that definitely they should be ending everything that they told about, after all, they have a team "just for that".
Again, some people will simply choose to live in eternal denial, even that the most obvious of the things is there, in front of them. They will refuse to see.
And they have a new name for people with eyes, ears and brain... They classify as "trolls", "haters", "naysayers" and other similar categories.
I comprehend them. In the fictional world that they created, reality, any reality, sucks. The important is to continue to believe in fairy tales and a Messiah, coming to save the day and proving all those "haters" wrong (despite the Messiah already failed many times along years, but in their short memory, they fail to remember).
Because THAT would sound very Hollywwood, right? This epic ending, where despite any trend, they are victorious!
And that's exactly the approach that CR has been using in all his speech, for his own sake of profit, despite the end result that its almost clear and obvious that will be a train wreck, because he says to those people exactly what they want to hear (even that its just bs), and in consequence, to give him more money.
A strictly personal view .... when judging a project i look for some things:
a) has the team delivered quality in the past ?... check
(Wing Commander, Privateer, Freelancer, various movies).. literally "space heritage" ;-)
b) does the team have relevant experience and expertise ? ... check
c) does the team have a business plan ? ... check
d) does the team communicate clearly and openly ? ... check
e) does the team adjust time tables when project objectives change ?... check (basically .. do they stay honest ?)
(i have been in too many projects where stupid adherence to outdated timetables caused all kinds of troubles)
(i have also met too many customers that waved an outdated timeline at me .. although THEY have tripled the
requirements themselves without acknowledging that this may take more time and therefore more money)
f) does the team report on progress and achieved milestones ? ... check
g) does it take some time until newly established groups in a company - that had to be selected, trained and settled in -
are starting to be productive ? .... check
So ... i personally am willing to put some money into this project called Star Citizen. YOUR mileage may vary.
Have fun
Heh.
You should really make a review your checkings. Just sayin.
All of these are under 10 minute scripted clips of nothing impressive. I will maintain, this game has shown basically nothing.
Played-Everything
Playing-LoL
>>>>
All of these are under 10 minute scripted clips of nothing impressive. I will maintain, this game has shown basically nothing.
>>>>
Beauty lies in The Eye of The Beholder ....
I don't need to watch those clips. I've seen a star fighter alpha on twitch, which was pretty impressive. You'll likely want a proper flight controller and throttle to fully immerse into the combat however. Further, there was a mockup of landing and exiting the ship at a loading dock. Hell, those clips alone were very impressive, and likely part of the ones mentioned above.
That said, it would seem that they are on track to create a really BIG experience. How that actually ties together, and why they are asking for more money in the way of overpriced artwork is strange. I maintain, finish the game and open the flood gates. If the experience is going to be that good, don't ruin it with prepaid extras that only raise questions, as many posts have expressed. The KS had its goals, they were met, while the 'stretch goals' may be nice, bring on the game and let the community go crazy over the product, quite with the nickel and dime pre-party fee.
In my opinion they WILL create this game ...
the timetable is debatable, but i personally prefer an "Its done when its done" (as the Duke would say ;-) over a rush job.
Essentially all the critics dont matter. The game is not made for you. Or the press. Or the publishers. The game is not financed by you. It does not depend on you in any way or form. That hurts, does it not ? :-)
The game is made for us. The backers. Its our decision. Its our money. We have the power. Even the power to wait. The beauty of crowdfunding :-D
Have fun
Of course they will create the game. Whether they put in the depth of gameplay they claim they will is another story.
Why would it hurt those people if they don't want to play the game anyway? Also why are you saying critics don't matter? Can't someone be a backer and a critic?
Most of the people who are most critical are people who backed the game and don't like the results or the direction.
Are you saying that crowdfunded games don't actually go on sale after they are released?
..Cake..
>>> Of course they will create the game. Whether they put in the depth of gameplay they claim they will is another story.
IMHO they will add depth in stages. Squadron 42 comes first, the rest will come later.
Why would it hurt ? Because e.g. they love another space game like Elite:Dangerous and started a Holy Crusade when Star Citizen started to grab the headlines. And so they started preaching against "Satan" SC. Pretty silly, i think, as i consider both games upcoming milestones of the space game genre and wish all the best to BOTH games. Just one example.
You can be a backer - adding your feedback (which might be negative) in a constructive way. A backer does not have to agree with everything the Star Citizen team does .... freedom of speech FTW. But a backer hopes that SC will be successful. Otherwise (s)he would not have supported the project.
You can be a critic instead of a backer - for whatever reason (CR pissed on your cat and/or you got permabanned from Star Citizen forums for excessive trolling etc.). If you are a critic and have paid some money for Star Citizen and now don't like it anymore ... sell your account and move on.
>>>Most of the people who are most critical are people who backed the game and don't like the results or the direction.
First ... you simply cannot please ALL 650 k people .. some wont like the result, WHATEVER you do. Thats life.
Second ... constructive feedback in the official SW forums FTW. Let them know what you dont like.
Third .... if the game continues to go into a direction you dont like ... move on (and in some cases: stop trolling)... see "First"
>>>you saying that crowdfunded games don't actually go on sale after they are released?
They can and do. But they don't HAVE to - its just a bonus.
Have fun
Who is "They"? This sounds like a conspiracy theory mate. There's fans and critics of both games all over the place.
Both games have been popular in the headlines actually and I haven't noticed SC monopolizing the headlines. In fact any E:D fan wouldn't be displeased with the headlines considering pretty much every member of the gaming press that has played the game has had positive things to say about it. Your statement doesn't make sense.
Noone said anything about SC not being successful though. You attacked critics in general.
See? You're attacking critics yet again, as if those two ridiculous excuses you parenthesized are the two main reasons for being a critic. Maybe people don't want to sell their accounts, maybe they'd rather the game moved in a direction that fits what they want out of the game. That's what a constructive critic would want. Don't you agree?
By SW I expect you mean SC? Also, as I said before it's practically impossible to post any critique in the official forums and not get attacked by fanatics or parrots with copy/paste excuses. Some people have the stamina to withstand this assault and keep on trying. I commend them for it. Most people don't even bother, which is bad for the development of the game.
They don't HAVE to? Disregarding F2P games (which make money in other ways and I'm not sure if any emerged from KS) do you know of a single crowdfunded game that wasn't for sale after it released?
..Cake..
As i said: They DO offer it for sale. For extra profit. Not for paying the bills (that has been done via a successful crowdfunding campaign ... UNLESS the crowdfunding money was only intended as a foundation to obtain more money from investors).
In principle the makers of a crowdfunding game that achieved and/or surpassed its goals would not HAVE to offer it for sale beyond the circle of backers. In reality, however, none of these teams would decline the extra money from additional sales.
FYI ... F2P from crowdfunding .. an example:
http://venturebeat.com/2013/09/12/big-viking-games-looks-to-crowdfund-its-next-free-to-play-rpg/
Have fun
"Extra profit"?
The purpose of crowd-funding, LEGALLY and more importantly, MORALLY speaking, is to pay the cost of the game, not profit.
Any profit, morally and legally speaking should be a problem for the company/the creator, after built the product, whatever it is, a potato salad or a game, not something to put in the shoulders of the backers financing the CONSTRUCTION of whatever it is.
I suppose that Chris Roberts and others are trying to transform the own objective of the crowdfunding business for their own sake. One of the reasons that I don't like the directions that they took.
Some people already called me "against the crowd-funding" and "against the game". That is totally non-sense. That is just the perception of someone that simply presumes that if you criticize you want them "to fail". The same can be said about crowdfunding, because their own attitude has putting the whole scheme in more danger to keep going, or raising with health, in the long term.
Seriously. Its so flawed their logic. If I wanted them to fail, as the majority which criticizes, I would just stay quiet, not letting people knowing of the mistake that they are doing. I would be there "applauding" them, if I really wanted them to fail.
This guy mentioned about his "feedback" about joysticks, and that people are ok with that in the CIG Forums. I dare him to give feedback (in case he is capable to give a proper one, as I am), about their business and marketing strategies. I just... dare him. Which is a ridiculous thing, such level of protection that they white-knight, mainly when the subject is their marketing strategies and the negative colateral damage (a very dangerous one) that it has, when its common sense, not just in the game industry, but in all industries, that its one of the most important factors, that usually, when the companies underestimate that, it will mean for them a quick death, or barely surviving in the medium/long term, mainly when the mistakes are institutionalized.
Worst, when they do not notice, that for a CEO, to take such risks of even raising such collateral damage, despite having 3 times above the budget, you have to understand that something is not right there. Sometimes, it becomes even worst when he knows that the question exists and all the time, avoid to answer, or search for the most of the vague of the answers that he could found to give, or overreacts with such simple questions and consider it, automatically "trolling" (almost like saying: "You are right, the only thing that I can do is to silence you, so others do not start to think under this, for my profit wishes, dangerous lines").
Exactly.
Or...despite all the marketing and the challenges for the whole industry, the talking about "we make money even without promotions", "new people come regardless", the fact is that it could be pure bs, to hype the own few that continue to pay
and
CIG considering the reality going on for so long (not really too much REAL new people coming and just a few accepting to be milked no matter what), they don't have a single tip of trust in themselves and in what they are doing that could attract new people earlier or after release FOR REAL.
And that's why they decided to follow this absolutely risky approach, risking to damage their image seriously, to contradict more and more their own "good speech" of "we vs. the evil greedy out there", and losing more trust between a majority of backers and backers in potential (making more people holding themselves to invite friends to a more probable train wreck), because that would be the only way to make money for them, in their view.
Even because with such few deciding to support them continuously, as I presume that is the case, it would be hard to keep the income after release, something that CR already told/mentioned that the future will depend on that, of "keeping the level of income" (how? if the ships will stop to be sold?).
It's there. It's obvious. The facts contradicts their marketing and their vibe of "massive success". And the facts are, besides the discrepancies of speech and obvious marketing tales of "saying whatever to achieve a new million milestone", are their own attitude and the approach that they have been using to pursuit money, despite how much they already have.
In the end, the "thank you" for the earlier backers is to give them the possibility, and strongly encourage (by hampering their in-game earlier experience, unless they spend more money) to spend the money of houses and cars in a game.
And for the naysayers, haters, trolls, doubters... they will get that all... almost for free.
And these "fans" (some could be just CIG Marketing puppets, with a marketing agenda) create threads in their forums to say "that the haters will flee ashamed", when in fact, the only people that could possibly win on this project are Chris Roberts and associates and the doubters.
There is no "win" to spend the money of real houses and cars by itself to make a freaking GAME to be created - and they say that I Am the crazy one, heh! Unless you will have money return with that, personally. It's the most clear and idiot thing that someone could do with their money (mainly considering that its a serious double-edge sword, mainly when persisted, they are paying more while that could represent a serious danger for the future).
CIG has already a very tiny niche to work (one that its minor even between Space Sim fans, since Space Sim fans are not equal to Machine Tunners fans, which in fact are a huge minority of this group in potential) and they go there and screw with what they already have, because "we can't make everyone happy"... but "we are happy to get the money of everyone regardless and motivate them to give more and more, always based more in draws and dreams and less in real stuff released and hampering their earlier in-game experience".
When if they were really thinking in the long term and in "don't suck", they would AVOID that, not motivate that, to create overhype, pressure of the press that will evaluate the game as a 100 million dollar game, not a game of 20-23, and will compare with others of the same genre with low budgets - curiously always been more effective in results - as well as increasing the size of the shit storm scenario that will come, possibly killing the project for good, in terms of long term viability.
Now how this is a troll, how this possibly is hate, or how possibly its not constructive, only a fan of CR, with their usual serious twisted logic, could TRY to explain. These guys always assume that 'marketing messages' are real. They are not. Stop to believe in bs of who will pursuit your money regardless what the future will bring for you, and wake up, before its too late.
It's a choice in the end of the day. These guys are happily and with all their proud of not admitting ever that "enough is enough", calling everyone else "crazy" and leading this project to his doom, or seriously delusional, that they are for real getting all this "new" players naturally, despite their whole marketing strategy/approach always telling you the contrary.
In any case, guys, in this battle that its only in your minds and in the mind of the own dev team, as I already figured out by their own defensive behavior in some letters and posts in their forums, the haters and doubters win, regardless the "game" that will come out. You should wake up to that too.
You are all just people that show total lack of skill to deal with feedback and refuse to admit that. An HR specialist would have one or two tips to give you about that and the thing seems even more serious, because goes beyond of just the white-knights, but causes negative impact even inside this development, inside the CIG group, definitely impacting negatively in productivity, as we not just could figure out or predict, but we even heard such thing happening from the testimony of some ex-employees.
And by my own experience with that team, that testimony definitely sounds true, by the overreaction that I received from some directive members of this team - directly from them by email - for the most of the simple and good faith suggestions that I tried to give in the past, showing that for real, those people hate feedback/critic, always look to that as "an act of an enemy", mainly when the subject is related to marketing strategy, customer support, customer interactions, communication, advertising messages and so on.
The flaw is not in us, is on these people that persists to do not learn or refuse to see the danger of what they are doing. I definitely have to wonder why, and sometimes, I am impressed because the most terrible of the answers that I could give, they start to fit more and more with the attitude of this team.
And for those opening threads about me in the CIG forums and Reddit (curiously accusing me to be people that I am not and spreading a lot of lies), if you have a legit interest in knowing (which i highly doubt and I presume that was another act in bad faith), but in case of someone else interested, I recommend you to read the dialogue between Ned Stark and Lord Varys, the Spider, when Ned is captive in the dungeons on King's Landing in "A Song of Ice and Fire - Volume I - Game of Thrones", mainly when Ned ask for the reasons for the Varys actions. His answer explains.
@ jcrg99
>>> the purpose of crowdfunding >>> is (according to Wikipedia)
“....the practice of raising funds from two or more people over the internet towards a common Service, Project, Product, Investment, Cause, and Experience..."
"... Crowdfunding campaigns provide producers with a number of benefits, beyond the strict financial gains.."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdfunding
--> Uupps, financial gains - by definition. That does not really fit with your sentence --> "The purpose of crowd-funding, LEGALLY and more importantly, MORALLY speaking, is to pay the cost of the game, not profit." Even Wikipedia mentions profit making.
>>>>I dare him to give feedback (in case he is capable to give a proper one, as I am), about their business and marketing strategies. I just... dare him. >>>>
I see no problem with their business and marketing strategy. So i have no reason to give negative feedback to CIG about that, no matter how much you "dare me" ;-)
Yes, crowdfunding can have its risks and even Wikipedia lists Donor exhaustion as one of those risks.
" ....Donor exhaustion – there is a risk that if the same network of supporters is reached out to multiple times, that network will eventually cease to supply necessary support."
So thats nothing special occuring only in the development for Star Citizen. Its NORMAL for most crowdfunding projects. Therefore its also not damaging for the game industry - they know about this for years already.
>>> ..that for a CEO, to take such risks ...>>>
Well, thats his JOB ! Taking risks and making decisions, getting money to pay for all this and doing promotion work.
CR is just doing his job. And - if history is any judge - its a job he has done well ... multiple times. And IMHO still does.
Have fun
Wikipedia mentioned... yeah... i should have stopped here and never replied to you again... but why should I lost the hope that I could give some light to another soul, maybe not you, but other readers that could mistakenly, like you, presume wikipedia as the ultimate true:
"
"
Have fun.
"Its NORMAL for most crowdfunding projects. Therefore its also not damaging for the game industry - they know about this for years already."
Since its normal for most, could you show me one other, any other that sell exclusive earlier access to important in-game items, by prices that goes from 1 to 33 times above the price of the full game or earlier access to it.
And try to find others that persist to call in "crowd-funding" after the crowd-funding period ended and the game announced as fully funded and with "all the complete vision of the owner for that game guaranteed to be implemented", per the CEO's speech of the company.
Tell me one more which crowd-funding campaign endured for more than 1 or 2 months, what saying about years.
I would agree in that people who think wikipedia is a source not worthy quoting should not be engaged in conversation with.
Lookie, mom, I can cut and paste too !!
"For the avoidance of doubt, in consideration of RSI’s good faith efforts to develop, produce, and deliver the Game with the funds raised, you agree that any deposit amounts applied against the Pledge Item Cost and the Game Cost as described above shall be non-refundable regardless of whether or not RSI is able to complete and deliver the Game and/or the pledge items. In the unlikely event that RSI is not able to deliver the Game and/or the pledge items, RSI agrees to post an audited cost accounting on its website to fully explain the use of the deposits for the Game Cost and the Pledge Item Cost. In consideration of the promises by RSI hereunder, you agree to irrevocably waive any claim for refund of any deposit amount that has been used for the Game Cost and Pledge Item Cost in accordance with the above."
Thats something YOU signed too when you pledged.
I personally have no problems with that, even the "..agree... non-refundable.." part
Terms of Service --> https://robertsspaceindustries.com/tos
And for all those that want to know what the status of Star Citizen is at any given moment ... look here:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/project-status
Have fun
I find parts of this conversation funny. Mostly the point that some how not having a schedule means it doesnt cost more
developer: 'for x million dollars we will create a dogfighting module which will be released on X date'
how does the developer plan to pay the staff if the dogfighting module takes longer than he expects?
Rule #1 of Kickstarter:
"Don’t break the law. Don’t take any action that infringes or violates other people’s rights, violates the law, or breaches any contract or legal duty you have toward anyone."
Anyway, not sure why you brought the statement above, since it has anything to do with the earlier discussion. As you can see, it still refers to pay cost, not to make profit.
Which actually means, in consideration of this deal, the situation in place that was a break/change of the deal for profit, or for make marketing appeal by expanding things, that not all customers necessarily signed for an eternal expansion, if that meant holding what was promised to them for a period of time, the law would consider THAT as "an act of bad faith", which basically invalidates the deal, since they broke it unilaterally, not with the approval of ALL customers.
Unless there was a clause saying that "the majority in a fake poll where non-backers can vote, could decide to break or not a deal"... pay attention to the fact that non-backers can decide too, which basically means one more act of bad faith from the company to the customers that they already had. Good luck in finding such clause that puts non-backers deciding by backers as ok, or just a tiny part of backers deciding for everyone.
Good luck to find another clause that take out from the company's shoulders, their legal responsibility of not doing deceptive marketing.
Just to let you "Mr. Wikipedia is the ultimate true".