Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

New Ship - Introductory Price of $850

rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 2,800
The Consolidated Outlands Pioneer will go on sale Friday, October 27th. It will have an introductory price of $850 and be in limited quantities.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/1/thread/spaceship-prices

Hangar ready will see the price increase by $100 or thereabout.
Flight ready will see the price increase again by another $100 or thereabout.

Get yours while it's cheap. This ship is the much hyped "game changer", do not miss out!!


pantaroAsm0deusRedempKyleranJakdstripperNephethMrMelGibsonKrematoryTokkenFrodoFraginsand 15 others.
«13456723

Comments

  • kikoodutroa8kikoodutroa8 Member UncommonPosts: 449
    It's funny cos there's still no game.
    TokkenThebeastttToodlesViper482RobsolfPagoasmrputtsBeezerbeez
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 648
    Why this is scandalous, this is daylight robbery, how can they get away with this? I am going to my bank now and if there is $850 missing I am calling the police! 
    CoticTalonsinFrodoFraginsrpmcmurphyDizismaViper482Pagoas
  • CoticCotic Member UncommonPosts: 178
    Orinori said:
    Why this is scandalous, this is daylight robbery, how can they get away with this? I am going to my bank now and if there is $850 missing I am calling the police! 
    Oh great repartee tomb3rt.

    So,
    if they introduce ships you can only get via $$$ you'll say, what's wrong you don't have to buy them!
    if they introduce lockboxes you'll say, what's wrong you don't have to buy them!
    if they introduce P2W you'll say, what's wrong you don't have to buy it!

    No wonder companies try to get away with all sorts of shit when they have apologists like yourself defending them.


    GdemamiDauzqulKefoRusquesgelRedempOctagon7711KyleranNephethFrodoFraginsand 18 others.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 11,001
    Cotic said:
    No wonder companies try to get away with all sorts of shit when they have apologists like yourself defending them.
    More like no wonder companies do not listen to your type....
    KyleranMrMelGibsonFrodoFraginsRhoklawYashaXThebeastttDizismasomeforumguyViper482postlarvaland 3 others.
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 648
    edited October 2017
    Cotic said:
    Orinori said:
    Why this is scandalous, this is daylight robbery, how can they get away with this? I am going to my bank now and if there is $850 missing I am calling the police! 
    Oh great repartee tomb3rt.

    So,
    if they introduce ships you can only get via $$$ you'll say, what's wrong you don't have to buy them!
    if they introduce lockboxes you'll say, what's wrong you don't have to buy them!
    if they introduce P2W you'll say, what's wrong you don't have to buy it!

    No wonder companies try to get away with all sorts of shit when they have apologists like yourself defending them.


    What? they didn't introduce those things yet?! I heard that in one of these limited sale things before they sold forced like 25 ships on people :O which almost provided a third of a poor days income for them. The schemes these scam artists come up with!

    anyway, i checked my bank and nothing is missing yet, but i am keeping my eyes on these guys >.>
    Post edited by Orinori on
    Dizisma
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 5,332
    edited October 2017
    So a supposed civilian capital ship meant to introduce a new profession, that's a first as they are all combat-based. It's mostly guilds who pledge for capitals anyway, if mine does, cool beans.

    Cotic said:
    No wonder companies try to get away with all sorts of shit when they have apologists like yourself defending them.
    You don't have to buy them, if you can earn them. I don't follow your mentality to be mad and riot at CIG because they continue to fund their game... 

    The big publishers get away with pushing revenue models to the limit for the sake of profit, but a crowdfunded project can't get away with doing pledge sales to fulfill the need to fund their operations? Weird standards...
    Post edited by MaxBacon on
    rpmcmurphyViper482Odeezee
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 648
    MaxBacon said:
    So a supposed civilian capital ship meant to introduce a new profession, that's a first as they are all combat-based.

    It's mostly guilds who pledge for capitals anyway
    Everyone in reddit seems to be talking about the ship being capable of building bases. Did they just guess this and just roll with it as fact with nothing to back it up?
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 3,460
    MaxBacon said:
    So a supposed civilian capital ship meant to introduce a new profession, that's a first as they are all combat-based. It's mostly guilds who pledge for capitals anyway, if mine does, cool beans.

    Cotic said:
    No wonder companies try to get away with all sorts of shit when they have apologists like yourself defending them.
    You don't have to buy them, if you can earn them. I don't follow your mentality to be mad and riot at CIG because they continue to fund their game... 

    The big publishers get away with pushing revenue models to the limit for the sake of profit, but a crowdfunded project can't get away with doing pledge sales to fulfill the need to fund their operations.

    Double Standards?
    Except big publishers get shit on as well so it's not double standards. Big publishers tend to actually realease games first though and then push the crappy revenue models. CIG being true to form is doing it backwards again and pushing the revenue model before the game.
    GdemamisgelMaxBaconNephethbartoni33YashaXrpmcmurphyEnik
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 5,332
    edited October 2017
    Kefo said:
    Except big publishers get shit on as well so it's not double standards. Big publishers tend to actually realease games first though and then push the crappy revenue models. CIG being true to form is doing it backwards again and pushing the revenue model before the game.
    Your argument is pretty ridiculous. Obviously, for any crowdfunded project the revenue model has to come first; because is from that revenue model that development is made possible in the first place. --'

    Not for profit, yet to maintain operations. But evil CIG I guess, this dead horse has been beaten for years and years and years, not beaten enough I see.
    Post edited by MaxBacon on
    rpmcmurphyOdeezee
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 3,460
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    Except big publishers get shit on as well so it's not double standards. Big publishers tend to actually realease games first though and then push the crappy revenue models. CIG being true to form is doing it backwards again and pushing the revenue model before the game.
    Your argument is pretty ridiculous. Obviously, for any crowdfunded project the revenue model has to come first; because is from that revenue model that development is made possible in the first place. --'

    Not for profit, yet to maintain operations. But evil CIG I guess, this dead horse has been beaten for years and years and years, not beaten enough I see.
    It's ridiculous because it's crowdfunded? I see plenty of crowdfunded games out there, past and present, who made due with what they raised and then built upon the game they released to the public with sales they earned. Not this selling pictures of ships for hundreds to thousands of dollars and constantly begging for more.
    MaxBaconGdemamiNephethbartoni33BananaSoupYashaXsomeforumguy
  • sgelsgel Member RarePosts: 1,808
    I'm so glad this project is crowdfunded and we get none of the greedy scummy publisher monetizing crap.

    850$ for PRE-ordering in-game "LIMITED" content and then increasing the price when you can actually freaking use this content, is absolutely fine.

    We might only have a glorified tech demo after 6 years of development but at least we're not publisher funded!

    HYPE!
    RedempKefoGdemamiSpottyGekkoJeleenaKyleranNephethMrMelGibsonKrematoryYashaXand 6 others.

    ..Cake..

  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 648
    Kefo said:
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    Except big publishers get shit on as well so it's not double standards. Big publishers tend to actually realease games first though and then push the crappy revenue models. CIG being true to form is doing it backwards again and pushing the revenue model before the game.
    Your argument is pretty ridiculous. Obviously, for any crowdfunded project the revenue model has to come first; because is from that revenue model that development is made possible in the first place. --'

    Not for profit, yet to maintain operations. But evil CIG I guess, this dead horse has been beaten for years and years and years, not beaten enough I see.
    It's ridiculous because it's crowdfunded? I see plenty of crowdfunded games out there, past and present, who made due with what they raised and then built upon the game they released to the public with sales they earned. Not this selling pictures of ships for hundreds to thousands of dollars and constantly begging for more.
    So crowdfunding should be limited because you don't like it when backers want to pledge for what is on offer? Now being as most people only spent a small amount of money on SC (from $20 - 60 ish). What is it you are suggesting? That a company should only be able to raise funds before they start work? what is it that you want exactly? please help
    DizismaOdeezee
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member EpicPosts: 4,233
    Orinori said:
    Kefo said:
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    Except big publishers get shit on as well so it's not double standards. Big publishers tend to actually realease games first though and then push the crappy revenue models. CIG being true to form is doing it backwards again and pushing the revenue model before the game.
    Your argument is pretty ridiculous. Obviously, for any crowdfunded project the revenue model has to come first; because is from that revenue model that development is made possible in the first place. --'

    Not for profit, yet to maintain operations. But evil CIG I guess, this dead horse has been beaten for years and years and years, not beaten enough I see.
    It's ridiculous because it's crowdfunded? I see plenty of crowdfunded games out there, past and present, who made due with what they raised and then built upon the game they released to the public with sales they earned. Not this selling pictures of ships for hundreds to thousands of dollars and constantly begging for more.
    So crowdfunding should be limited because you don't like it when backers want to pledge for what is on offer? Now being as most people only spent a small amount of money on SC (from $20 - 60 ish). What is it you are suggesting? That a company should only be able to raise funds before they start work? what is it that you want exactly? please help
    Or maybe, go the route Elite is traveling and build the base game that was originally advertised, using the continued crowdfunding revenue to build upon that.

    That would entice me much more to give them money.  It's why Elite has my cash, but CIG hasn't received a dime from me, actually.
    GdemamiKyleranNephethVrikaYashaXDizismaKefoScotchUpRobsolfMaurgrimand 2 others.

    image
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 648
    sgel said:
    I'm so glad this project is crowdfunded and we get none of the greedy scummy publisher monetizing crap.

    850$ for PRE-ordering in-game "LIMITED" content and then increasing the price when you can actually freaking use this content, is absolutely fine.

    We might only have a glorified tech demo after 6 years of development but at least we're not publisher funded!

    HYPE!
    I know right! I got hundreds of hours of play already out of just the tech demo! and all for only $35! Makes me laugh when I think of some of those other games I spent WAY more on and uninstalled after 15 mins xD

    welcome to the train bro!
    Dizisma
  • sgelsgel Member RarePosts: 1,808
    Orinori said:
    sgel said:
    I'm so glad this project is crowdfunded and we get none of the greedy scummy publisher monetizing crap.

    850$ for PRE-ordering in-game "LIMITED" content and then increasing the price when you can actually freaking use this content, is absolutely fine.

    We might only have a glorified tech demo after 6 years of development but at least we're not publisher funded!

    HYPE!
    I know right! I got hundreds of hours of play already out of just the tech demo! and all for only $35! 
    You should probably tell that to people who haven't tried the tech demo.
    Anyone who has, knows that content barely exists.
    There's games on steam that cost 0.99$, made by one person, who have more content than Star Citizen has now.
    NephethYashaXDizismaMaurgrimangerbeaverOdeezee

    ..Cake..

  • sgelsgel Member RarePosts: 1,808
    Orinori said:
    Makes me laugh when I think of some of those other games I spent WAY more on and uninstalled after 15 mins xD


    Guess you're not a very wise with your purchases then.
    Star Citizen would love you as a customer ;)

    ..Cake..

  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 3,460
    Orinori said:
    Kefo said:
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    Except big publishers get shit on as well so it's not double standards. Big publishers tend to actually realease games first though and then push the crappy revenue models. CIG being true to form is doing it backwards again and pushing the revenue model before the game.
    Your argument is pretty ridiculous. Obviously, for any crowdfunded project the revenue model has to come first; because is from that revenue model that development is made possible in the first place. --'

    Not for profit, yet to maintain operations. But evil CIG I guess, this dead horse has been beaten for years and years and years, not beaten enough I see.
    It's ridiculous because it's crowdfunded? I see plenty of crowdfunded games out there, past and present, who made due with what they raised and then built upon the game they released to the public with sales they earned. Not this selling pictures of ships for hundreds to thousands of dollars and constantly begging for more.
    So crowdfunding should be limited because you don't like it when backers want to pledge for what is on offer? Now being as most people only spent a small amount of money on SC (from $20 - 60 ish). What is it you are suggesting? That a company should only be able to raise funds before they start work? what is it that you want exactly? please help
    @MadFrenchie answered your question for me.

    and @sgel hit the nail on the head lol
  • VarobVarob Member UncommonPosts: 9
    This game is never gonna see daylight.  :s
    Viper482ScotchUpRhimetomdavidsonangerbeaver
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 648
    Orinori said:
    Kefo said:
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    Except big publishers get shit on as well so it's not double standards. Big publishers tend to actually realease games first though and then push the crappy revenue models. CIG being true to form is doing it backwards again and pushing the revenue model before the game.
    Your argument is pretty ridiculous. Obviously, for any crowdfunded project the revenue model has to come first; because is from that revenue model that development is made possible in the first place. --'

    Not for profit, yet to maintain operations. But evil CIG I guess, this dead horse has been beaten for years and years and years, not beaten enough I see.
    It's ridiculous because it's crowdfunded? I see plenty of crowdfunded games out there, past and present, who made due with what they raised and then built upon the game they released to the public with sales they earned. Not this selling pictures of ships for hundreds to thousands of dollars and constantly begging for more.
    So crowdfunding should be limited because you don't like it when backers want to pledge for what is on offer? Now being as most people only spent a small amount of money on SC (from $20 - 60 ish). What is it you are suggesting? That a company should only be able to raise funds before they start work? what is it that you want exactly? please help
    Or maybe, go the route Elite is traveling and build the base game that was originally advertised, using the continued crowdfunding revenue to build upon that.

    That would entice me much more to give them money.  It's why Elite has my cash, but CIG hasn't received a dime from me, actually.
    If Star Citizen was built as originally pitched I don't think they would have ever been able to expand it into the game it is trying to become now, which is why most people were happy to let CIG go for the bigger vision, it looked far more promising as an experience. Since that first push for a larger game they are doing exactly what you are talking about here, it is just taking longer.

    Interesting that you have no problem giving money to Elite, I refused to pay the extortionate amount of money for the game and its expansions! How much money did you pay for that to date?! I played the original a lot but couldn't imagine playing that now, I thought about it for the PvP for a short while, right up until I heard that people can just vanish onto their own server if they like?? anyway, I am not here to bash ED, I am more than sure it suits a lot of people just fine.
    DizismaOdeezee
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 648
    edited October 2017
    sgel said:
    There's games on steam that cost 0.99$, made by one person, who have more content than Star Citizen has now.
    It turns out that creating a small crap game is faster and far easier than making 2 cutting edge AAA games that may have decades of appeal, who knew! you live and learn though.
    Post edited by Orinori on
    ErillionDizismaMaurgrimOdeezee
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 3,460
    Orinori said:
    Orinori said:
    Kefo said:
    MaxBacon said:
    Kefo said:
    Except big publishers get shit on as well so it's not double standards. Big publishers tend to actually realease games first though and then push the crappy revenue models. CIG being true to form is doing it backwards again and pushing the revenue model before the game.
    Your argument is pretty ridiculous. Obviously, for any crowdfunded project the revenue model has to come first; because is from that revenue model that development is made possible in the first place. --'

    Not for profit, yet to maintain operations. But evil CIG I guess, this dead horse has been beaten for years and years and years, not beaten enough I see.
    It's ridiculous because it's crowdfunded? I see plenty of crowdfunded games out there, past and present, who made due with what they raised and then built upon the game they released to the public with sales they earned. Not this selling pictures of ships for hundreds to thousands of dollars and constantly begging for more.
    So crowdfunding should be limited because you don't like it when backers want to pledge for what is on offer? Now being as most people only spent a small amount of money on SC (from $20 - 60 ish). What is it you are suggesting? That a company should only be able to raise funds before they start work? what is it that you want exactly? please help
    Or maybe, go the route Elite is traveling and build the base game that was originally advertised, using the continued crowdfunding revenue to build upon that.

    That would entice me much more to give them money.  It's why Elite has my cash, but CIG hasn't received a dime from me, actually.
    If Star Citizen was built as originally pitched I don't think they would have ever been able to expand it into the game it is trying to become now, which is why most people were happy to let CIG go for the bigger vision, it looked far more promising as an experience. Since that first push for a larger game they are doing exactly what you are talking about here, it is just taking longer.

    ? anyway, I am not here to bash ED, I am more than sure it suits a lot of people just fine.
    Would it not have been able to expand into the game as pitched now because people would have realized Chris Roberts is an idiot and sells dreams and not actual games when he runs his own studios? That's rather telling that you don't have the confidence in CIG to pull in that kind of funding if they released the base game and then built upon it especially if you've gotten hundreds of hours out of the game already.
    Dizisma
  • sgelsgel Member RarePosts: 1,808
    edited October 2017
    Orinori said:
    sgel said:
    There's games on steam that cost 0.99$, made by one person, who have more content than Star Citizen has now.
    It turns out that creating a small crap game is faster than making 2 cutting edge AAA games that may have decades of appeal, who knew! you live and learn though.
    Yeah that's it. Call a game crap without even know what title you're talking about just because it's compared against Star Citizen. Not a cult.

    As for decades of appeal... you spelled "development" wrong.
    Post edited by sgel on
    KefoMrMelGibsonYashaXDizismaRobsolfEnik

    ..Cake..

  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 648
    sgel said:
    Orinori said:
    Makes me laugh when I think of some of those other games I spent WAY more on and uninstalled after 15 mins xD


    Guess you're not a very wise with your purchases then.
    Star Citizen would love you as a customer ;)
    I am a customer, I spent $35 years ago, are you not reading or taking in what I am saying? 
    DizismaOdeezee
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member EpicPosts: 6,701
    Why do people say, "You don't have to buy one." Like it's something that never occurred to the other person?  
    MrMelGibsonDizismaOdeezee
    “And once the storm is over, you won’t remember how you made it through, how you managed to survive. You won’t even be sure, whether the storm is really over. But one thing is certain. When you come out of the storm, you won’t be the same person who walked in. That’s what this storm’s all about.”  ― Haruki Murakami
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 3,460
    Why do people say, "You don't have to buy one." Like it's something that never occurred to the other person?  
    Only rebuttal they have when you bring up the insane price for a picture
    Octagon7711MrMelGibsonDizismaHariken
Sign In or Register to comment.