I actually watched the streams where almost everyone was in the same main stream. Summed up,not very exciting,not many seemed excited either.There were not many viewers at all,it was like 500% more busy during Stardew's release weeks and that is sad.
It almost makes me think that most of the money gained is from a very small audience,like a bunch of people that already spent way more than they should be spending on this game.
All i saw from the audience was a lot of !!! and whatever word they were typing in hopes of attaining some prizes or something,not many seemed interested in the actual game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
All i saw from the audience was a lot of !!! and whatever word they were typing in hopes of attaining some prizes or something,not many seemed interested in the actual game.
I actually watched the streams where almost everyone was in the same main stream. Summed up,not very exciting,not many seemed excited either.There were not many viewers at all,it was like 500% more busy during Stardew's release weeks and that is sad.
1st: It was already known we would see this, the PG v2, so it can't hit much as a surprise. 2nd: There was a lot of expectation to see SQ42's gameplay so see the delay announced without that, or even a trailer was kinda a bummer.
So it was cool, as V2 is not for 3.0, being what we saw at GC for 3.0... the waiting game.
If you'll be able to buy stuff after the game is out why would they milk this half game? They would make more money with the game out sooner.
Your point makes no sense.
Also...
GIANT SPACE WORMS!!
They have said that you will not be able to buy stuff once the game launches. And they will limit how much you are able to buy. So right now there is no rules on how much players buy but once the game launches they claim they will limit it.
You'll be able to buy ingame currency with real money. Chris said that many many times. That's their answer for gold seller spammers.
Also... I hope you all enjoy your ships... Since anyone can steal it from you. Keep buying.
Yes you can buy ingame currency. It will be limited on how much you can purchase per day or something like that. To keep P2W down is the reasons they gave for such an idea. So like I said. They have no reason to launch this game because right now they have unlimited amount of money players can spend and once game launches they plan to limit how much players can spend.
Yeah the SQ42 cut was what really hit negatively here, one thing is the expected delay but the no gameplay or even a trailer of it was rather un-expected as CitCon was mostly about SQ42, then they had to burn time that would otherwise be filled with it.
Side of that, the PG v2 demo shows that they can achieve pretty amazing stuff in-game, once able to procedurally spawn this shipwrecks, the players exploring able to find them, dynamically have weather and weather events as demoed... Pretty amazing things can happen and it provides a motivation to explore.
They have no reason to launch this game because right now they have unlimited amount of money players can spend and once game launches they plan to limit how much players can spend.
No they don't, you gotta be kidding if you think they wouldn't raise those limits over not release the game, that's far from logic. The money they raise TODAY comes with liabilities to deliver something that is not yet delivered, the money they raise after release is profit with no liability than deliver the game that already exists. Things that you do not consider when you make such statements.
If you'll be able to buy stuff after the game is out why would they milk this half game? They would make more money with the game out sooner.
Your point makes no sense.
They have already said that once the game launches you will be able to buy all the ships with ingame money. If most of the people who are interested in the game have already purchased it and there is no sub fee and ships can be earned in game, how does it not make sense?
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
Its simple and somehow the fans just don't get it. Right now you can spend over 20k$ on Star Citizen and get various ships and the sort. Once the game launches you won't be able to spend more then 30$ a day. So yes its much more profitable for them to string you along and keep sucking tons of money while producing very slow progress. Because most of the money to be made is from developing this game and not actually launching it. Is it really that hard to understand?
They also said ship prices will be going up over time so the ships at launch will required a lot more work to get because they will be more expensive then they are now.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
That demo was obviously a lot of scripts but it gave me such a Star Wars vibe I really wasn't expecting and hit quite pleasantly.
It really shows what they are really going for and are capable of, having a dynamic system able to generate wrecks like that, spawns the AI and then the missions that players enrol by scanning attempting to find these delericts.
And Tracy is pretty much on the editor proving and showing the raw tools they used to create this that exist are not any faked fantasy.
I believe the real challenge is get all of this working well on a smooth multiplayer experience.
You really don't understand what the PG system is for ... it does not dynamically create missions AND spawns the Mission objects on the planets - The Mission objects are already there, handplaced and scripted to be interactive. maybe there are 4 generated Missions that includes these assets like Find document X, Disable generator Y, Rescue guy Z, Slay the f***** worm. The PG Planet system does exactly what it says, it generates planetsides, it can also spawn flora and fauna - but everything else has been placed by hand. BTW what you saw was again an SQ42 mission not Star Citizen. (2 different games - Quote: SC Followers)
The Editor thing after this was confusing, because the Editor blend out at the end in playmode - either the whole thing was scripted with the blend out in the end or someone wrote an blend-out-on-keystroke and either hopped to the keyboard or did it remotely.
Both shown demos looked very staged.
Yes and everything is pushed back now ... again ... with the addition that the coming soon v3.0 has not much in common with the GC v3.0 demo anymore. It seems that CIG is not longer developing a game they are developing the insight of a chaotic dev studio that rolls out a Demo Video every now and then.
You are not any longer pledging/donating/buying for a video game ... you pay C-class actors for a soap opera
*drops mic*
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it. The cake is a lie.
You really don't understand what the PG system is for ... it does not dynamically create missions AND spawns the Mission objects on the planets - The Mission objects are already there, handplaced and scripted to be interactive. maybe there are 4 generated Missions that includes these assets like Find document X, Disable generator Y, Rescue guy Z, Slay the f***** worm. The PG Planet system does exactly what it says, it generates planetsides, it can also spawn flora and fauna - but everything else has been placed by hand. BTW what you saw was again an SQ42 mission not Star Citizen. (2 different games - Quote: SC Followers)
The Editor thing after this was confusing, because the Editor blend out at the end in playmode - either the whole thing was scripted with the blend out in the end or someone wrote an blend-out-on-keystroke and either hopped to the keyboard or did it remotely.
Both shown demos looked very staged.
Yes and everything is pushed back now ... again ... with the addition that the coming soon v3.0 has not much in common with the GC v3.0 demo anymore. It seems that CIG is not longer developing a game they are developing the insight of a chaotic dev studio that rolls out a Demo Video every now and then.
You are not any longer pledging/donating/buying for a video game ... you pay C-class actors for a soap opera
*drops mic*
Oi? Sorry but you are the one who does not understand.
The direction IS to procedurally generate this delericts on both planets and space, that is what adds the explore part of gameplay of the game. This has been discussed by the developers involved on its direction and design that they are taking, since they firstly shown that first desert crashed starfarer on ATV time ago that this is to procedurally spawn into the planets, merge the assets with the terrain and so on without the artist.
Who is saying that was SQ42? There was only one bit that leads to something related to character on SQ42 that was not on the demo but on the editor after when Sean Tracy beams to the second planet and it spawns that ship that then QT jumps away. (and that felt more like one intentional easter egg, or even what was going to lead to what they originally intended to show of SQ42 but didn't; as well is reusing SQ42 assets for demos, what they do frequently both on demos, ATV, etc...)
I have no idea what you are on about 3.0 as well, I don't see what is not on common? What changed? Or are you just saying bold things for attention?
Of course all CIG does is create demo videos every now and then, but of course... Let's all pretend a game is being developed... Then of course with comments like that I'm supposed to take you seriously and not as a joke, well then, I shall go with the later towards you.
Nothing but a circle-jerk behavior of <insert anything negative towards SC/CIG here>. "The dogs keep barking as the caravan moves forward", what else...
CitizenCon was awful, how does anyone support this crap. Nothing more than just a new tech demo with stuff copied from Star Wars and Dune.
No Sq42 which was really disappointing, nothing about Star Marine, 2.6 or 3.0, just loads of padding and more crap about "But look at all the wonderful stuff we have lined up for you guys..."
I never thought I'd say this but "Derek Smart was right".
This year's CitizenCon was even more pathetic than last year's one and you have to try really hard to achieve that. My god....
Nothing but a circle-jerk behavior of <insert anything negative towards SC/CIG here>. "The dogs keep barking as the caravan moves forward", what else...
This is true for those who are defending the game as well. Both sides show exactly the same behaviour, that is blatantly obvious....
without getting feelings involved for a second, stuff got delayed again, and there wasn't an awful lot of stuff to begin with. Of course peope are disappointed and question what is going on. Roberts keeps on overpromising and it is damaging his viability and product no matter the actual quality he will be able to deliver.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
without getting feelings involved for a second, stuff got delayed again, and there wasn't an awful lot of stuff to begin with. Of course peope are disappointed and question what is going on.
To clarify this for you, what hit as a disappointment on Citizencon was not the fact SQ42 was delayed, because we already know that was going to happen and what was missing was the official announcement of it, and so it was.
It was about no SQ42 gameplay, not even a trailer, this after said Citcon was mostly about SQ42. It was suddenly cut from the whole presentation and that was not expected, what resulted in a weak presentation as its highlight was not there and that's what people were waiting to see.
CitizenCon was awful, how does anyone support this crap. Nothing more than just a new tech demo with stuff copied from Star Wars and Dune.
No Sq42 which was really disappointing, nothing about Star Marine, 2.6 or 3.0, just loads of padding and more crap about "But look at all the wonderful stuff we have lined up for you guys..."
I never thought I'd say this but "Derek Smart was right".
This year's CitizenCon was even more pathetic than last year's one and you have to try really hard to achieve that. My....
I agree this year it was really really bad. I think the only reason they did it was to show you the video for the new ship they are selling. Otherwise it was a waste of time and probably a waste of money. But then again They probably made 10 mil off this.
You don't know how much money you'll be blocked to spend once the game is out. You don't know. That information doesn't exist yet. When Chris talked about the limitations he was just answering a question in 10 for the chairman and said "we didn't figure this out yet, but we'll create some sort of system to avoid exploitation".
Just like maaany other things Chris said he wants but how it would be they don't know yet - Like cargo security (bombs, tracking) and hacking.
Yet... for the sake of your point, you use it. I'm talking about what we know for fact. That's all.
Don't you think once the game is out the numbers of contractors and other employee will lower so they'll have less cost?
They need SQ42 sells to make good money.
No bipolarity, please. I'm not defending the game just because I disagree with you - that is attacking it. I'm not a backer, I have nothing to do with the project. I'm just correcting your statement.
1. You will not be able to purchase ships from CIG at all.
2. We DO know how he is going to limit spending. They are going to make it so you cannot buy more credits then a player can make in 1 day. They want to give a working person the opportunity to keep at pace with someone who plays the game all day. And when you look at economy in general for any mmo on the market. You can do that with less then 5$. So me saying 30$ is being very generous.
1. You will not be able to purchase ships from CIG at all.
2. We DO know how he is going to limit spending. They are going to make it so you cannot buy more credits then a player can make in 1 day. They want to give a working person the opportunity to keep at pace with someone who plays the game all day. And when you look at economy in general for any mmo on the market. You can do that with less then 5$. So me saying 30$ is being very generous.
That would not be a viable model at all.
The "hardcore" backers spending large amounts on ships is a large part of their funding model. If you look at new ship announcements and sales, you always see a big spike in funding that keeps dwindling down, until the next announcement.
Limiting the spending of the high-spenders is not the trend in the game industry lately, it is in fact the exact opposite. It is also not something I'd expect from Star Citizen.
Noone knows what the final model will be - their announcements keep changing all the time. Whatever it will be though, it will likely involve the option of spending large amounts of money over a short period of time. Might be on ships (directly or indirectly), might be on something else.
It definitely won't be a model where a person can't spend more than 10$ a day.
1. You will not be able to purchase ships from CIG at all.
2. We DO know how he is going to limit spending. They are going to make it so you cannot buy more credits then a player can make in 1 day. They want to give a working person the opportunity to keep at pace with someone who plays the game all day. And when you look at economy in general for any mmo on the market. You can do that with less then 5$. So me saying 30$ is being very generous.
That would not be a viable model at all.
The "hardcore" backers spending large amounts on ships is a large part of their funding model. If you look at new ship announcements and sales, you always see a big spike in funding that keeps dwindling down, until the next announcement.
Limiting the spending of the high-spenders is not the trend in the game industry lately, it is in fact the exact opposite. It is also not something I'd expect from Star Citizen.
Noone knows what the final model will be - their announcements keep changing all the time. Whatever it will be though, it will likely involve the option of spending large amounts of money over a short period of time. Might be on ships (directly or indirectly), might be on something else.
It definitely won't be a model where a person can't spend more than 10$ a day.
No, they have been consistent about this topic for years now. I do not believe it myself but that is what they are claiming. They will only sell what a player is capable of making in a day.
1. You will not be able to purchase ships from CIG at all.
2. We DO know how he is going to limit spending. They are going to make it so you cannot buy more credits then a player can make in 1 day. They want to give a working person the opportunity to keep at pace with someone who plays the game all day. And when you look at economy in general for any mmo on the market. You can do that with less then 5$. So me saying 30$ is being very generous.
That would not be a viable model at all.
The "hardcore" backers spending large amounts on ships is a large part of their funding model. If you look at new ship announcements and sales, you always see a big spike in funding that keeps dwindling down, until the next announcement.
Limiting the spending of the high-spenders is not the trend in the game industry lately, it is in fact the exact opposite. It is also not something I'd expect from Star Citizen.
Noone knows what the final model will be - their announcements keep changing all the time. Whatever it will be though, it will likely involve the option of spending large amounts of money over a short period of time. Might be on ships (directly or indirectly), might be on something else.
It definitely won't be a model where a person can't spend more than 10$ a day.
No, they have been consistent about this topic for years now. I do not believe it myself but that is what they are claiming. They will only sell what a player is capable of making in a day.
Will be interesting to see if they can stick with this, the lure of easy money has a very strong appeal.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
1. You will not be able to purchase ships from CIG at all.
2. We DO know how he is going to limit spending. They are going to make it so you cannot buy more credits then a player can make in 1 day. They want to give a working person the opportunity to keep at pace with someone who plays the game all day. And when you look at economy in general for any mmo on the market. You can do that with less then 5$. So me saying 30$ is being very generous.
That would not be a viable model at all.
The "hardcore" backers spending large amounts on ships is a large part of their funding model. If you look at new ship announcements and sales, you always see a big spike in funding that keeps dwindling down, until the next announcement.
Limiting the spending of the high-spenders is not the trend in the game industry lately, it is in fact the exact opposite. It is also not something I'd expect from Star Citizen.
Noone knows what the final model will be - their announcements keep changing all the time. Whatever it will be though, it will likely involve the option of spending large amounts of money over a short period of time. Might be on ships (directly or indirectly), might be on something else.
It definitely won't be a model where a person can't spend more than 10$ a day.
No, they have been consistent about this topic for years now. I do not believe it myself but that is what they are claiming. They will only sell what a player is capable of making in a day.
Will be interesting to see if they can stick with this, the lure of easy money has a very strong appeal.
Its all a part of "buy them now before you can't" Hurry its a limited offer.
Being a backer for over three years now, all I can say is that I'm very pleased with the progress CIG has made. I don't have specific knowledge of every tiny detail involved in development, but what I have seen through Around the Verse, Reverse the Verse, CitCon, and Convention presentations, gives a very good insight. This is difficult, very difficult, which is why no other developer has attempted anything close to it.
Am I hyped? Certainly, but not to the point of delusion as some might claim. Star Citizen isn't a cult, but rather the fulfillment (or the potential thereof) of the type of game we've all dreamed of since the first time we picked up a controller or a joystick. Chris has picked up that mantle, and all I can have is respect for the man who has attempted to create a vision that damn near everyone said was impossible (and even some of the things they've already accomplished). Are there setbacks? Certainly!. Are there disappointments? Yes. However, there has never been any game development project that hasn't suffered those. If you strive to create something so revolutionary, which so many deemed impossible, you're bound to run into a few of those.
The one point that remains fixed in my gaze, is the continual progress which they have made. From what I've seen in regards to the behind the scenes of development, seriously dissuades me from believing in the conspiracy theories. Most specifically those that claim the demos are staged and the entire project is just a farce to make money, which in my opinion on both, shows either ignorance or simple hatred.
The technical achievements necessary to even present the demo, disprove the staged argument. Additionally, the amount of time and energy which has already been poured into the project, disproves the notion that it is bogus. I ask what 360 plus people, at four studios, are doing, if it just a scam. Why create so many assets (see Jared's accidental leak of models) it it was just a scam? The point being that the amount of effort seems superfluous to just support a money-making scam.
In conclusion, I say this. For those that believe in the project, stay the course, and your patience will be justly rewarding. For those with outrageous criticism, I just think you're wrong, but I also think you'll be very surprised in the end.
It's not a complete scam; something will eventually be released. But it's all about Roberts ego. Sadly, that ego doesn't match his actual design skills or management competence. Roberts has never released a single game that he was in total control of. The only project that was totally his was the Wing Commander movie. Have fun watching that.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Comments
Summed up,not very exciting,not many seemed excited either.There were not many viewers at all,it was like 500% more busy during Stardew's release weeks and that is sad.
It almost makes me think that most of the money gained is from a very small audience,like a bunch of people that already spent way more than they should be spending on this game.
All i saw from the audience was a lot of !!! and whatever word they were typing in hopes of attaining some prizes or something,not many seemed interested in the actual game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Have fun
2nd: There was a lot of expectation to see SQ42's gameplay so see the delay announced without that, or even a trailer was kinda a bummer.
So it was cool, as V2 is not for 3.0, being what we saw at GC for 3.0... the waiting game.
No SQ42 mission was a let-down.
SC with a "Star Wars meets Dune" vibe was nice.
Have fun
Side of that, the PG v2 demo shows that they can achieve pretty amazing stuff in-game, once able to procedurally spawn this shipwrecks, the players exploring able to find them, dynamically have weather and weather events as demoed... Pretty amazing things can happen and it provides a motivation to explore.
No they don't, you gotta be kidding if you think they wouldn't raise those limits over not release the game, that's far from logic. The money they raise TODAY comes with liabilities to deliver something that is not yet delivered, the money they raise after release is profit with no liability than deliver the game that already exists. Things that you do not consider when you make such statements.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
The PG Planet system does exactly what it says, it generates planetsides, it can also spawn flora and fauna - but everything else has been placed by hand.
BTW what you saw was again an SQ42 mission not Star Citizen. (2 different games - Quote: SC Followers)
The Editor thing after this was confusing, because the Editor blend out at the end in playmode - either the whole thing was scripted with the blend out in the end or someone wrote an blend-out-on-keystroke and either hopped to the keyboard or did it remotely.
Both shown demos looked very staged.
Yes and everything is pushed back now ... again ... with the addition that the coming soon v3.0 has not much in common with the GC v3.0 demo anymore.
It seems that CIG is not longer developing a game they are developing the insight of a chaotic dev studio that rolls out a Demo Video every now and then.
You are not any longer pledging/donating/buying for a video game ... you pay C-class actors for a soap opera
*drops mic*
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
Oi? Sorry but you are the one who does not understand.
The direction IS to procedurally generate this delericts on both planets and space, that is what adds the explore part of gameplay of the game. This has been discussed by the developers involved on its direction and design that they are taking, since they firstly shown that first desert crashed starfarer on ATV time ago that this is to procedurally spawn into the planets, merge the assets with the terrain and so on without the artist.
Who is saying that was SQ42? There was only one bit that leads to something related to character on SQ42 that was not on the demo but on the editor after when Sean Tracy beams to the second planet and it spawns that ship that then QT jumps away. (and that felt more like one intentional easter egg, or even what was going to lead to what they originally intended to show of SQ42 but didn't; as well is reusing SQ42 assets for demos, what they do frequently both on demos, ATV, etc...)
I have no idea what you are on about 3.0 as well, I don't see what is not on common? What changed? Or are you just saying bold things for attention?
Of course all CIG does is create demo videos every now and then, but of course... Let's all pretend a game is being developed... Then of course with comments like that I'm supposed to take you seriously and not as a joke, well then, I shall go with the later towards you.
Nothing but a circle-jerk behavior of <insert anything negative towards SC/CIG here>.
"The dogs keep barking as the caravan moves forward", what else...
No Sq42 which was really disappointing, nothing about Star Marine, 2.6 or 3.0, just loads of padding and more crap about "But look at all the wonderful stuff we have lined up for you guys..."
Original - http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3748466&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=4551#post462019951 (paywall)
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-07-15-through-gritted-teeth-star-citizen-developer-gives-player-whopping-usd2500-refund
CIG is sued by Crytek
https://www.polygon.com/2017/12/14/16776300/crytek-star-citizen-lawsuit-cig-rsi
EX-Backer StreetRoller sues Chris Roberts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojx7VcbowYQ
without getting feelings involved for a second, stuff got delayed again, and there wasn't an awful lot of stuff to begin with. Of course peope are disappointed and question what is going on. Roberts keeps on overpromising and it is damaging his viability and product no matter the actual quality he will be able to deliver.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
It was about no SQ42 gameplay, not even a trailer, this after said Citcon was mostly about SQ42. It was suddenly cut from the whole presentation and that was not expected, what resulted in a weak presentation as its highlight was not there and that's what people were waiting to see.
2. We DO know how he is going to limit spending. They are going to make it so you cannot buy more credits then a player can make in 1 day. They want to give a working person the opportunity to keep at pace with someone who plays the game all day. And when you look at economy in general for any mmo on the market. You can do that with less then 5$. So me saying 30$ is being very generous.
The "hardcore" backers spending large amounts on ships is a large part of their funding model. If you look at new ship announcements and sales, you always see a big spike in funding that keeps dwindling down, until the next announcement.
Limiting the spending of the high-spenders is not the trend in the game industry lately, it is in fact the exact opposite. It is also not something I'd expect from Star Citizen.
Noone knows what the final model will be - their announcements keep changing all the time. Whatever it will be though, it will likely involve the option of spending large amounts of money over a short period of time. Might be on ships (directly or indirectly), might be on something else.
It definitely won't be a model where a person can't spend more than 10$ a day.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Am I hyped? Certainly, but not to the point of delusion as some might claim. Star Citizen isn't a cult, but rather the fulfillment (or the potential thereof) of the type of game we've all dreamed of since the first time we picked up a controller or a joystick. Chris has picked up that mantle, and all I can have is respect for the man who has attempted to create a vision that damn near everyone said was impossible (and even some of the things they've already accomplished). Are there setbacks? Certainly!. Are there disappointments? Yes. However, there has never been any game development project that hasn't suffered those. If you strive to create something so revolutionary, which so many deemed impossible, you're bound to run into a few of those.
The one point that remains fixed in my gaze, is the continual progress which they have made. From what I've seen in regards to the behind the scenes of development, seriously dissuades me from believing in the conspiracy theories. Most specifically those that claim the demos are staged and the entire project is just a farce to make money, which in my opinion on both, shows either ignorance or simple hatred.
The technical achievements necessary to even present the demo, disprove the staged argument. Additionally, the amount of time and energy which has already been poured into the project, disproves the notion that it is bogus. I ask what 360 plus people, at four studios, are doing, if it just a scam. Why create so many assets (see Jared's accidental leak of models) it it was just a scam? The point being that the amount of effort seems superfluous to just support a money-making scam.
In conclusion, I say this. For those that believe in the project, stay the course, and your patience will be justly rewarding. For those with outrageous criticism, I just think you're wrong, but I also think you'll be very surprised in the end.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.