This is what people really believe they're getting when they invest in Star Citizen

Distopia

Adjuvant1 said:

Why does it hurt you so that I express opinions contrary to yours, in the process citing relevant references? Are you hurt by the way I actively negate the spin of scorg propaganda?

You know I know the answer to this and why. I just thought you'd like to talk about it.

It's funny because I generally agree with the underlying points you guys champion..., yet I still find myself on the opposite end of the debate. Most of what you guys post simply comes off as extremely combative, dismissive, as well as complete mockery of anything you don't agree with.

You label any stance that is not in accordance to the theme of definitive scam, foul play, ulterior motives,etc... as white knighting. 

SO even typical realities (long development times for large ambitious games) become taboo subjects we're supposed to feel ashamed to bring up. Leaving room for one argument and one argument alone (everyone is being duped). 

So in the end I don't think this has much to do with your opinion, it's how you're putting it out there, no one likes to be in a framed debate, it's dishonest and serves no real purpose.

SEANMCAD

Distopia said:

Adjuvant1 said:

Why does it hurt you so that I express opinions contrary to yours, in the process citing relevant references? Are you hurt by the way I actively negate the spin of scorg propaganda?

You know I know the answer to this and why. I just thought you'd like to talk about it.

It's funny because I generally agree with the underlying points you guys champion..., yet I still find myself on the opposite end of the debate. Most of what you guys post simply comes off as extremely combative, dismissive, as well as complete mockery of anything you don't agree with.

You label any stance that is not in accordance to the theme of definitive scam, foul play, ulterior motives,etc... as white knighting. 

SO even typical realities (long development times for large ambitious games) become taboo subjects we're supposed to feel ashamed to bring up. Leaving room for one argument and one argument alone (everyone is being duped). 

So in the end I don't think this has much to do with your opinion, it's how you're putting it out there, no one likes to be in a framed debate, it's dishonest and serves no real purpose.

agreed

the passionate distaste for SC by some people is off the charts bizzare to be frank.

not sure what the root source of it all is but as someone who is really rather neutral and somewhat skeptical of the project itself said behavior looks very much Lord of the Flies(ish)

Shodanas

Adjuvant1 said:

Shodanas said:

Velocinox said:

Is there some group I have to join so I can make posts about Star Citizen so the mods won't stealth delete it?

Actually yes, see my comment above about the trio Stooges. The OP is a member, the other two you can easily identify by making a quick survey regarding SC related threads over the past 10 - 15 days.

Why does it hurt you so that I express opinions contrary to yours, in the process citing relevant references? Are you hurt by the way I actively negate the spin of scorg propaganda?

You know I know the answer to this and why. I just thought you'd like to talk about it.

I never created a single thread about SC on these boards. Contrary to you and the other two with a thread sum counting in the dozens over the past few days alone. Same 3 persons making thread after thread after thread. So, you may reconsider about who is making propaganda and who isn't.

As for expressing opinions... keep telling yourself that. Apparently you and the other 2 have some strange views about what is an opinion and how it is portrayed.

Talonsin

SEANMCAD said:

as someone who is really rather neutral and somewhat skeptical of the project itself said behavior looks very much Lord of the Flies(ish)

I find it odd that you frequently post that you are a critic of the game or neutral, and yet the majority of your posts support the game or condemn those who have issues with it.  Are you sure you understand what "rather neutral", "somewhat skeptical" and "critic" mean?

GrumpyHobbit

Talonsin said:

SEANMCAD said:

as someone who is really rather neutral and somewhat skeptical of the project itself said behavior looks very much Lord of the Flies(ish)

I find it odd that you frequently post that you are a critic of the game or neutral, and yet the majority of your posts support the game or condemn those who have issues with it.  Are you sure you understand what "rather neutral", "somewhat skeptical" and "critic" mean?

"The moon is made out of Cheese!"

Hard to say anything to rebut such an argument and remain 'rather neutral'.

Distopia

Talonsin said:

SEANMCAD said:

as someone who is really rather neutral and somewhat skeptical of the project itself said behavior looks very much Lord of the Flies(ish)

I find it odd that you frequently post that you are a critic of the game or neutral, and yet the majority of your posts support the game or condemn those who have issues with it.  Are you sure you understand what "rather neutral", "somewhat skeptical" and "critic" mean?

I really don't see how you view much of what he posts as supporting the devs, it's simply disagreeing with how someone else interprets the recent headlining atrocity CR has committed on a given day. Is your view of these debates really that narrow?

 We're all (for the most part) giving our personal view of a given subject, I just don't see how people maneuver themselves into such small corridors in these debates. Especially the "they're supporting the devs" stance (that one has always been laughable to me). As though that is just outright bad, as if that "side" could never be in the right. 

I mean yeah I get it, it's forum PVP... right? what else could it be lol. I mean if we're not here to discuss all possibilities, why be here at all? Other than some round and round forum brawl with no end...

Adjuvant1

DirtyDozen said:

I'm beginning to wonder if they're getting paid for each thread they make.

Haven't even thought of it. No clue who would pay me for it.

Adjuvant1

Shodanas said:

Adjuvant1 said:

Shodanas said:

Velocinox said:

Is there some group I have to join so I can make posts about Star Citizen so the mods won't stealth delete it?

Actually yes, see my comment above about the trio Stooges. The OP is a member, the other two you can easily identify by making a quick survey regarding SC related threads over the past 10 - 15 days.

Why does it hurt you so that I express opinions contrary to yours, in the process citing relevant references? Are you hurt by the way I actively negate the spin of scorg propaganda?

You know I know the answer to this and why. I just thought you'd like to talk about it.

I never created a single thread about SC on these boards. Contrary to you and the other two with a thread sum counting in the dozens over the past few days alone. Same 3 persons making thread after thread after thread. So, you may reconsider about who is making propaganda and who isn't.

As for expressing opinions... keep telling yourself that. Apparently you and the other 2 have some strange views about what is an opinion and how it is portrayed.

So, you don't want to talk about it. Okie. Fair enough.

Burntvet

People do not "invest" in SC or any other crowdfunded game effort, nor do they "donate".

They are pre-purchasing product that has not been developed yet, and CC companies, banks, and even courts are starting to acknowledge this.

Do a 10 second google search on crowdfunding + investing of you REALLY want to see what that looks like (and the US Government has already laid down a whole bunch of rules on that particular kind of mess).


So, not investing.

BeansnBread

It's kind of sad that people are trying to defend them using these anti-consumer arguments. They get extremely vague and start calling it "donating to a dream" or "investing in a idea." It's so obvious that it's a purchase that I often wonder about their motives. 

Distopia

Burntvet said:

People do not "invest" in SC or any other crowdfunded game effort, nor do they "donate".

They are pre-purchasing product that has not been developed yet, and CC companies, banks, and even courts are starting to acknowledge this.

Do a 10 second google search on crowdfunding + investing of you REALLY want to see what that looks like (and the US Government has already laid down a whole bunch of rules on that particular kind of mess).


So, not investing.

BeansnBread said:

It's kind of sad that people are trying to defend them using these anti-consumer arguments. They get extremely vague and start calling it "donating to a dream" or "investing in a idea." It's so obvious that it's a purchase that I often wonder about their motives. 

The problem with both of your posts is it only looks to what is in essence a legal view on it (thats' how it reads anyway).. Which totally ignores whatever motivation a person may have individually. You don't decide that for anyone. 

Adjuvant1

Distopia said:

Burntvet said:

People do not "invest" in SC or any other crowdfunded game effort, nor do they "donate".

They are pre-purchasing product that has not been developed yet, and CC companies, banks, and even courts are starting to acknowledge this.

Do a 10 second google search on crowdfunding + investing of you REALLY want to see what that looks like (and the US Government has already laid down a whole bunch of rules on that particular kind of mess).


So, not investing.

BeansnBread said:

It's kind of sad that people are trying to defend them using these anti-consumer arguments. They get extremely vague and start calling it "donating to a dream" or "investing in a idea." It's so obvious that it's a purchase that I often wonder about their motives. 

The problem with both of your posts is it only looks to what is in essence a legal view on it (thats' how it reads anyway).. Which totally ignores whatever motivation a person may have individually. You don't decide that for anyone. 

Do you really, really feel very many people gave CIG money in a manner similar to "make a wish foundation", or do you really, really feel many people have CIG money believing they were in a opportune position to buy into a product, advertised to them with flashy videos and promises.

edit: I'm asking you what you think, personally. There's not an option of "it doesn't matter what I think". It apparently does because you just voiced your opinion. I'd like the rest of it.

BeansnBread

Distopia said:

Burntvet said:

People do not "invest" in SC or any other crowdfunded game effort, nor do they "donate".

They are pre-purchasing product that has not been developed yet, and CC companies, banks, and even courts are starting to acknowledge this.

Do a 10 second google search on crowdfunding + investing of you REALLY want to see what that looks like (and the US Government has already laid down a whole bunch of rules on that particular kind of mess).


So, not investing.

BeansnBread said:

It's kind of sad that people are trying to defend them using these anti-consumer arguments. They get extremely vague and start calling it "donating to a dream" or "investing in a idea." It's so obvious that it's a purchase that I often wonder about their motives. 

The problem with both of your posts is it only looks to what is in essence a legal view on it (thats' how it reads anyway).. Which totally ignores whatever motivation a person may have individually. You don't decide that for anyone. 

Wow, what an extreme change of opinion since the last time. You're right, there is no accounting for your opinion that there might be some people that consider a purchase a donation. When someone gives $100 to a game development studio, they sometimes expect nothing in return. I'm actually sure that does exist in some minuscule percentage of people.

Distopia

Adjuvant1 said:

Distopia said:

Burntvet said:

People do not "invest" in SC or any other crowdfunded game effort, nor do they "donate".

They are pre-purchasing product that has not been developed yet, and CC companies, banks, and even courts are starting to acknowledge this.

Do a 10 second google search on crowdfunding + investing of you REALLY want to see what that looks like (and the US Government has already laid down a whole bunch of rules on that particular kind of mess).


So, not investing.

BeansnBread said:

It's kind of sad that people are trying to defend them using these anti-consumer arguments. They get extremely vague and start calling it "donating to a dream" or "investing in a idea." It's so obvious that it's a purchase that I often wonder about their motives. 

The problem with both of your posts is it only looks to what is in essence a legal view on it (thats' how it reads anyway).. Which totally ignores whatever motivation a person may have individually. You don't decide that for anyone. 

Do you really, really feel very many people gave CIG money in a manner similar to "make a wish foundation", or do you really, really feel many people have CIG money believing they were in a opportune position to buy into a product, advertised to them with flashy videos and promises.

 you think it makes more sense that a bunch of people are throwing away a bunch of money on a ship for a game that may very well never be made?.. I'd think there would be more to it than that Jpeg you guys are going on and on about all the time. At least with the funding angle they'd be trying to ensure it releases through funding it...

BeansnBread

Distopia said:

Adjuvant1 said:

Distopia said:

Burntvet said:

People do not "invest" in SC or any other crowdfunded game effort, nor do they "donate".

They are pre-purchasing product that has not been developed yet, and CC companies, banks, and even courts are starting to acknowledge this.

Do a 10 second google search on crowdfunding + investing of you REALLY want to see what that looks like (and the US Government has already laid down a whole bunch of rules on that particular kind of mess).


So, not investing.

BeansnBread said:

It's kind of sad that people are trying to defend them using these anti-consumer arguments. They get extremely vague and start calling it "donating to a dream" or "investing in a idea." It's so obvious that it's a purchase that I often wonder about their motives. 

The problem with both of your posts is it only looks to what is in essence a legal view on it (thats' how it reads anyway).. Which totally ignores whatever motivation a person may have individually. You don't decide that for anyone. 

Do you really, really feel very many people gave CIG money in a manner similar to "make a wish foundation", or do you really, really feel many people have CIG money believing they were in a opportune position to buy into a product, advertised to them with flashy videos and promises.

 you think it makes more sense that a bunch of people are throwing away a bunch of money on a ship for a game that may very well never be made... I'd think there would be more to it than that Jpeg you guys are going on and on about all the time. 

No, I think they expect it to be made.

MrSnuffles

Brenics said:

Looks like they are waking up. Must be hell when reality hits you sqaure in the nose!

https://t.co/4wcwlF33G3

That thread is gone, you made a screenshot? Always make screenshots, they delete threads that they don't like over at the Star Citizen dream factory.

Have faith!

Distopia

BeansnBread said:

Distopia said:

Adjuvant1 said:

Distopia said:

Burntvet said:

People do not "invest" in SC or any other crowdfunded game effort, nor do they "donate".

They are pre-purchasing product that has not been developed yet, and CC companies, banks, and even courts are starting to acknowledge this.

Do a 10 second google search on crowdfunding + investing of you REALLY want to see what that looks like (and the US Government has already laid down a whole bunch of rules on that particular kind of mess).


So, not investing.

BeansnBread said:

It's kind of sad that people are trying to defend them using these anti-consumer arguments. They get extremely vague and start calling it "donating to a dream" or "investing in a idea." It's so obvious that it's a purchase that I often wonder about their motives. 

The problem with both of your posts is it only looks to what is in essence a legal view on it (thats' how it reads anyway).. Which totally ignores whatever motivation a person may have individually. You don't decide that for anyone. 

Do you really, really feel very many people gave CIG money in a manner similar to "make a wish foundation", or do you really, really feel many people have CIG money believing they were in a opportune position to buy into a product, advertised to them with flashy videos and promises.

 you think it makes more sense that a bunch of people are throwing away a bunch of money on a ship for a game that may very well never be made... I'd think there would be more to it than that Jpeg you guys are going on and on about all the time. 

No, I think they expect it to be made.

Well it wouldn't be if they don't fund it now will it?

Kefo

Xeno.phon said:

[mod edit]

[mod edit] The problem is that we don't know what's true or not since CR likes to change what he says when it suits him and then pretend what he has been saying for weeks/months/years before that was us just misunderstanding him.

I also hate to break it to you but the industry will go tits up regardless if there are critics or not. 

@Distopia here is a prime example of the other side of the fence for your argument. You say you agree with most of the points made by the detractors but find yourself in the other camp well here is the other side of the coin for you. You don't have anything nice to say about SC and if you know you can't defend your position then just resort to hurling insults.

Distopia

Kefo said:

@Distopia here is a prime example of the other side of the fence for your argument. You say you agree with most of the points made by the detractors but find yourself in the other camp well here is the other side of the coin for you. You don't have anything nice to say about SC and if you know you can't defend your position then just resort to hurling insults.

I don't typically resort to personal insults, I feel it undermines any point that follows it. 

Adjuvant1

Distopia said:

BeansnBread said:

Distopia said:

Adjuvant1 said:

Distopia said:

Burntvet said:

People do not "invest" in SC or any other crowdfunded game effort, nor do they "donate".

They are pre-purchasing product that has not been developed yet, and CC companies, banks, and even courts are starting to acknowledge this.

Do a 10 second google search on crowdfunding + investing of you REALLY want to see what that looks like (and the US Government has already laid down a whole bunch of rules on that particular kind of mess).


So, not investing.

BeansnBread said:

It's kind of sad that people are trying to defend them using these anti-consumer arguments. They get extremely vague and start calling it "donating to a dream" or "investing in a idea." It's so obvious that it's a purchase that I often wonder about their motives. 

The problem with both of your posts is it only looks to what is in essence a legal view on it (thats' how it reads anyway).. Which totally ignores whatever motivation a person may have individually. You don't decide that for anyone. 

Do you really, really feel very many people gave CIG money in a manner similar to "make a wish foundation", or do you really, really feel many people have CIG money believing they were in a opportune position to buy into a product, advertised to them with flashy videos and promises.

 you think it makes more sense that a bunch of people are throwing away a bunch of money on a ship for a game that may very well never be made... I'd think there would be more to it than that Jpeg you guys are going on and on about all the time. 

No, I think they expect it to be made.

Well it wouldn't be if they don't fund it now will it?

Maybe that would have been better. In any event, it "has been funded". A 20 million game has received 100 million. Even with "increased scope", they need to come up with something, and SQ42 isn't going to cut it, because that ain't a 5 year, 100 million game.

Deathenger

SEANMCAD said:

Distopia said:

SEANMCAD said:

BeansnBread said:

Velocinox said:

That's funny. The last post I made about Star Citizen got deleted without any message as to why. No warning, no contact from the mod at all...

Is there some group I have to join so I can make posts about Star Citizen so the mods won't stealth delete it?

That happened to me about a week ago as well. No message, it just disappeared. And there was nothing inflammatory in it.

it more than likely got moved, not deleted. the effect is the same no notification

Nope it's all a part of the SC conspiracy... nothing negative said about SC is allowed to stay up on these forums... 

exactly.

 Tinfoil hat on -

There is a person in particular who is a walking talking advertisement/customer service/damage control/SC encyclopedia and gets to post with impunity. Although advertising is not allowed this individual continues the good work for SC on these forums. I don't see any advertising by SC on this site in an official manner so I can only assume that perhaps his omnipresence on these forums has got to be a deal worked out between SC and MMORPG.com. 

With that said, it comes to no suprise that negativity toward SC would be ninja deleted. 

- Tinfoil hat off

Seriously though, this dude it's taking food right out of the mouths of Bill Murphys family by advertising on behalf of SC on these forums instead of paying the site for advertising.

BeansnBread

Distopia said:

No, I think they expect it to be made.

Well it wouldn't be if they don't fund it now will it?

Wtf?

I expect them to make the game according to plan like every sane person would. I honestly have no issues with the game in general. I have a specific issue with them breaking promises that the people purchasing were told, that not only weren't fulfilled on time, but were completely changed. That is all. People should get their money back if they are disappointed with the sudden change in direction. And in my opinion, by any means necessary.

Kefo

Distopia said:

Kefo said:

@Distopia here is a prime example of the other side of the fence for your argument. You say you agree with most of the points made by the detractors but find yourself in the other camp well here is the other side of the coin for you. You don't have anything nice to say about SC and if you know you can't defend your position then just resort to hurling insults.

I don't typically resort to personal insults, I feel it undermines any point that follows it. 

Didn't mean you personally if that's how you took it. I didn't feel like trying to multi quote on my phone lol. 

As as for your response I fully agree with you, although I am sure I've been guilty of it a few times lol

Distopia

BeansnBread said:

Distopia said:

No, I think they expect it to be made.

Well it wouldn't be if they don't fund it now will it?

Wtf?

I expect them to make the game according to plan like every sane person would. I honestly have no issues with the game in general. I have a specific issue with them breaking promises that the people purchasing were told, that not only weren't fulfilled on time, but were completely changed. That is all. People should get their money back if they are disappointed with the sudden change in direction. And in my opinion, by any means necessary.

I don't particularly like them breaking promises either, but what does that have to do with what we're debating? We're talking about sales/funding in this side conversation are we not? 

Distopia

Kefo said:

Distopia said:

Kefo said:

@Distopia here is a prime example of the other side of the fence for your argument. You say you agree with most of the points made by the detractors but find yourself in the other camp well here is the other side of the coin for you. You don't have anything nice to say about SC and if you know you can't defend your position then just resort to hurling insults.

I don't typically resort to personal insults, I feel it undermines any point that follows it. 

Didn't mean you personally if that's how you took it. I didn't feel like trying to multi quote on my phone lol. 

As as for your response I fully agree with you, although I am sure I've been guilty of it a few times lol

I'm sure we all have when frustration takes over haha. I didn't say I never do .. At this point I just know to bow out before it gets to that point.. OR use the ignore function, haven't had a warning or ban in ages since I took that approach.

Gotcha though, I didn't think you were talking about me, just making a point to distance myself from that.