Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Star Citizen Wins Prestigious "Worst MMO Business Model Of 2017" Award

189101113

Comments

  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited December 2017
    Orinori said:
    But all those % figures were using data that seem completely unreasonable to use and once again were using starter ships and not single ships and using %backer figures from most obscure s***e where i have even pointed out should have been 1/2 not 1/3 so what have I learned........NOTHING!

    So no, not what I claimed, not what I claimed at all.

    Please use English and punctuation if you want people to accurately understand what you are saying. I can hardly make head nor tail of this.

    Are you now saying we're using starter ships and not single ships because that is not how this started at all as can be seen via the screenshot below.


    Dude...it says single ship in the quote. I claimed you used starter ship prices in your calculations when i said single ship. now yo are quoting me saying exactly what i stated......single ship!
    rpmcmurphy
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,497
    Orinori said:
    So try to clarify my minimum position. While many new backers may buy starter ships, not all new backers do. This means the figure of $60 in your examples is incorrect, it is likely far higher give the price of ships. My position is also that Your %of backers is completely incorrect. I don't know how to rectify that beyond finding a proper official statement on the issue and failing that a decent statistical analysis of other sites and there sign up to backer ratio that at least might be of some real use to help make guesses.

    But that is a lot of work when you can just look at these figures and make your own guesses from them ^^

    1892 new Citizens giving

    $127,659

    an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.

    And no I am not averse to people using other figures from other times out side of sales and stuff in same format as above to make broad stroke guesses and assumptions from.

    But what is the probability that a new backer is going to buy a higher priced single ship?
    Why would they buy a higher priced single ship if it does not include the game?
    What is the probability that the majority of new backers are going to do this?
    Is it not far more reasonable to assume that most people will buy one or both game packages for $45 + $15?

    Orinori said:
    Orinori said:
    But all those % figures were using data that seem completely unreasonable to use and once again were using starter ships and not single ships and using %backer figures from most obscure s***e where i have even pointed out should have been 1/2 not 1/3 so what have I learned........NOTHING!

    So no, not what I claimed, not what I claimed at all.

    Please use English and punctuation if you want people to accurately understand what you are saying. I can hardly make head nor tail of this.

    Are you now saying we're using starter ships and not single ships because that is not how this started at all as can be seen via the screenshot below.


    Dude...it says single ship in the quote. I claimed you used starter ship prices in your calculations when i said single ship. now yo are quoting me saying exactly what i stated......single ship!
    And in the post I was responding to you said "...and once again were using starter ships and not single ships..." hence the question.

    I swear this is like banging your head against a brick wall.
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    And in the post I was responding to you said "...and once again were using starter ships and not single ships..." hence the question.

    I swear this is like banging your head against a brick wall.
    Yes YOU were using starter ships, completely clear and easy to follow. I am sorry you find it so difficult to follow.
    rpmcmurphy
  • RouzukiRouzuki Member UncommonPosts: 66
    Eldrach said:
    All this discussion about wether or not it's an MMO...The fact is. The business model has gone too far. The game, when released, won't be a good experience for anyone. There will be too many with high end ships from day one, it'll be a nightmare to balance. The game will either (a Feel like a cash grab in order to have a chance of "catching" up to the big spenders or b) The big spenders will feel cheated as it's too easy to catch up to their 1000 dollar ships.

    I see no way this will be a clean experience :/
    I always expected for case B. Pledging should have never been about buying a significant advantage over other players before the game even released. It should have only ever been about donating to the project to ensure its completion/improvement.
    rpmcmurphy
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,497
    edited December 2017
    Orinori said:
    And in the post I was responding to you said "...and once again were using starter ships and not single ships..." hence the question.

    I swear this is like banging your head against a brick wall.
    Yes YOU were using starter ships, completely clear and easy to follow. I am sorry you find it so difficult to follow.
    So you are trolling, thanks for confirming. You were the one who said "....and once again were (notice the use of "we are" instead of "YOU") using starter ships and not single ships".

    If you can't even understand what you are saying how can you expect anyone else to.
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Orinori said:
    So try to clarify my minimum position. While many new backers may buy starter ships, not all new backers do. This means the figure of $60 in your examples is incorrect, it is likely far higher give the price of ships. My position is also that Your %of backers is completely incorrect. I don't know how to rectify that beyond finding a proper official statement on the issue and failing that a decent statistical analysis of other sites and there sign up to backer ratio that at least might be of some real use to help make guesses.

    But that is a lot of work when you can just look at these figures and make your own guesses from them ^^

    1892 new Citizens giving

    $127,659

    an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.

    And no I am not averse to people using other figures from other times out side of sales and stuff in same format as above to make broad stroke guesses and assumptions from.

    But what is the probability that a new backer is going to buy a higher priced single ship?
    Why would they buy a higher priced single ship if it does not include the game?
    What is the probability that the majority of new backers are going to do this?
    Is it not far more reasonable to assume that most people will buy one or both game packages for $45 + $15?
    Because friends said buy this one its awesome, because they have extra cash and buying into something that looks much better because many reason, who knows and I have no idea what percentage. So no I don't think it is more reasonable to just assume EVERYONE just buys in minimum. You think those fools who spend 24k on the game bought in with a mustang and got hooked?! No chance. So sorry the figure is unreasonably low. If I wanted to guess as it seems a common thing around here I would say easily 1/3rd of people go straight for the heavily advertised hornet within first day or upgrade first couple of days after access, figures out the ass because seems reasonable. Others may go for bigger ships, who knows.

     
    rpmcmurphy
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Orinori said:
    And in the post I was responding to you said "...and once again were using starter ships and not single ships..." hence the question.

    I swear this is like banging your head against a brick wall.
    Yes YOU were using starter ships, completely clear and easy to follow. I am sorry you find it so difficult to follow.
    So you are trolling, thanks for confirming. You were the one who said "....and once again were (notice the use of "we are" instead of "YOU") using starter ships and not single ships".

    If you can't even understand what you are saying how can you expect anyone else to.
    were is not 'we are', that would be we're. I understand just fine thanks. 
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,497
    Orinori said:
    Because friends said buy this one its awesome, because they have extra cash and buying into something that looks much better because many reason, who knows and I have no idea what percentage. So no I don't think it is more reasonable to just assume EVERYONE just buys in minimum. You think those fools who spend 24k on the game bought in with a mustang and got hooked?! No chance. So sorry the figure is unreasonably low. If I wanted to guess as it seems a common thing around here I would say easily 1/3rd of people go straight for the heavily advertised hornet within first day or upgrade first couple of days after access, figures out the ass because seems reasonable. Others may go for bigger ships, who knows.

     

    LOL, just fraking LOL.

    Everything you wrote amounts to "feels", there is absolutely nothing to back any of this up.

    One only has to look at other kickstarter projects and see which tiers sell out to get an idea of how the majority of people spend their money when it comes to crowdfunding.

    A whale might buy in with expensive ships or multiple ships but we are not talking about whales. We are talking about your claims that the majority of CIG's funding comes from new backers who spend in the price range of a single ship.

  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited December 2017
    Orinori said:
    Because friends said buy this one its awesome, because they have extra cash and buying into something that looks much better because many reason, who knows and I have no idea what percentage. So no I don't think it is more reasonable to just assume EVERYONE just buys in minimum. You think those fools who spend 24k on the game bought in with a mustang and got hooked?! No chance. So sorry the figure is unreasonably low. If I wanted to guess as it seems a common thing around here I would say easily 1/3rd of people go straight for the heavily advertised hornet within first day or upgrade first couple of days after access, figures out the ass because seems reasonable. Others may go for bigger ships, who knows.

     

    LOL, just fraking LOL.

    Everything you wrote amounts to "feels", there is absolutely nothing to back any of this up.

    One only has to look at other kickstarter projects and see which tiers sell out to get an idea of how the majority of people spend their money when it comes to crowdfunding.

    A whale might buy in with expensive ships or multiple ships but we are not talking about whales. We are talking about your claims that the majority of CIG's funding comes from new backers who spend in the price range of a single ship.

    Except I know many who have done this and this isn't any other crowdfunder, you can get in and play most those ships that are on offer right now which is bound to affect the level new comers pledge. A whale buys at top end, we are only talking about the lower level entry stuff of which there are plenty to choose between.

    and yes we are talking about how I claim majority (51% min) of CIG's funding comes from new backers who spend in the price range of a single ship which we can make a reasoned guess from these figures -

    1892 new Citizens giving

    $127,659

    an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.



    Post edited by Orinori on
    rpmcmurphyEponyxDamor
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,497
    edited December 2017
    No it does not at all. That is just your opinion, there is no statistical evidence that people are paying more because they can play it now.

    We already did the maths on those numbers, it came to 44% in the absolute best case which you then started crying about and saying that it's a quiet time... provide mathematical examples if you want to be taken a bit more seriously.

    1892 new forum accounts with 630 paid accounts giving $127,659, an average of $202 between them, over the last 3 days.

    Fixed that for you.

    ===

    Now I am really going to upset you.

    450 staff at 10,000 per month = $4,500,000 a month / 30 days = $150,000 a day.

    $127,659 / 3 = $42,553 per day, a daily shortfall of $107,447. Game over man, game over.
  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 3,002
    No it does not at all. That is just your opinion, there is no statistical evidence that people are paying more because they can play it now.

    We already did the maths on those numbers, it came to 44% in the absolute best case which you then started crying about and saying that it's a quiet time... provide mathematical examples if you want to be taken a bit more seriously.

    1892 new forum accounts with 630 paid accounts giving $127,659, an average of $202 between them, over the last 3 days.

    Fixed that for you.

    ===

    Now I am really going to upset you.

    450 staff at 10,000 per month = $4,500,000 a month / 30 days = $150,000 a day.

    $127,659 / 3 = $42,553 per day, a daily shortfall of $107,447. Game over man, game over.
    Salary is a bit high but you're not factoring in power, plant, production, and other misc overhead. 

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance

  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited December 2017
    No it does not at all. That is just your opinion, there is no statistical evidence that people are paying more because they can play it now.

    We already did the maths on those numbers, it came to 44% in the absolute best case which you then started crying about and saying that it's a quiet time... provide mathematical examples if you want to be taken a bit more seriously.

    1892 new forum accounts with 630 paid accounts giving $127,659, an average of $202 between them, over the last 3 days.

    Fixed that for you.

    ===

    Now I am really going to upset you.

    450 staff at 10,000 per month = $4,500,000 a month / 30 days = $150,000 a day.

    $127,659 / 3 = $42,553 per day, a daily shortfall of $107,447. Game over man, game over.
    Plenty of evidence that not EVERY person buys lowest pack, how ridiculous to suggest there isn't.

     All ready been here, pointless when you ignoring information already provided. it coming to 44% is irrelevant as it is a real sample we can use to gain insight from, you are free to gather data from uneventful areas that calculate higher, then you must also account for high sales periods and players who are new backers at that time. All pointless as we have an average from the beginning of time for total Citizens and total raised that still falls well within my claim. 

    FUNDS RAISED
    173,691,403
    STAR CITIZENS
    1,941,577

    be my guest, lets just not start using bogus 1/3rd claims pulled from anus though ey? and not using base starter packs instead of single ship price :)
    Post edited by Orinori on
    rpmcmurphy
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,497
    Orinori said:
    All ready been here, pointless when you ignoring information already provided. it coming to 44% is irrelevant as it is a real sample we can use to gain insight from, are are free to gather data from uneventful areas that calculate higher, then you must also account for high sales periods and players who are new backers at that time. All pointless as we have an average from the beginning of time for total Citizens and total raised that still falls well within my claim. 
    So in other words you have nothing.
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited December 2017
    Orinori said:
    All ready been here, pointless when you ignoring information already provided. it coming to 44% is irrelevant as it is a real sample we can use to gain insight from, are are free to gather data from uneventful areas that calculate higher, then you must also account for high sales periods and players who are new backers at that time. All pointless as we have an average from the beginning of time for total Citizens and total raised that still falls well within my claim. 
    So in other words you have nothing.

    All reasonable assumptions and nothing official that counters it.


    FUNDS RAISED
    173,691,403
    STAR CITIZENS
    1,941,577


    Even at 50% backer to signup ratio that would require in the region of $89* single ship newcomer for 50% and $267 for rest (just to make maths nice and easy using 50%) to make my statement pretty much correct that majority of funds come from single ship purchases from newcomers. Nothing here beyond reasonable, 50% is the ratio given from the useless turbulent link, I would be very surprised if the backer ratio was not way higher which decreases amount required all round every time. You want to make it more specific for 51% for majority....be my guest but it won't be far from those figures abviously!

    *$89 was used for quick calculations but is easily in the realm for new single ship newcomer purchases when well advertised Hornet (which you can jump in right now) is $153 and all other flavour of cool ships are in the $80 - $150 region that many newcomers aim for.

    All reasonable assumptions! and even on the very low end as my personal guess would be 70% backer to sign up ratio!

    You really don't need to bother with all that rubbish though, you could just look at

    1892 new Citizens giving

    $127,659

    an average of $67 between them over the last 3 days.

    Which easily supports same stance with high backer to citizen ratio and a majority of low single ship purchase figures from newcomers. Which is exactly where we started and what I was stating, making all the hoop jumping nonsense a complete waste of time.


    You want to get hung up on the detail, that's great but not much use (due to lack of available facts). I would prefer to look at the rough and see what it means. It is clear to see that people are not going insane all over the place with more and more and more and more and more purchases. But in fact the figures are reasonably low for a game that people have had access to for many many years and nothing out of the ordinary in the industry for cash paid towards the game you are interested in per year. Most people own 1 ship from their only purchase, lots have upgraded to a better single ship over time, some own 2-3 and the rare few own stupid amounts.


    Post edited by Orinori on
    rpmcmurphy
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751

    Now I am really going to upset you.

    450 staff at 10,000 per month = $4,500,000 a month / 30 days = $150,000 a day.

    $127,659 / 3 = $42,553 per day, a daily shortfall of $107,447. Game over man, game over.
    I can only be thankful you are not with the accountants advising CIG!
    rpmcmurphy
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Kind of a re-defining of the word "prestigious", that is unless we call every award given by a random website "prestigious". I haven't seen anything given out by MMORPG.com labeled as "prestigious". It's not even an award given by a collective of industry experts, it's voted by fans, lol. 

    That being said, *shocker* yes, Star Citizen is still a polarizing topic. Check here just about any day of the week. 

    As far as models go, it's made somewhere approaching $180 million from fans without delivering anything but a rough alpha. To me, from a business perspective, that's pretty much as good as it gets. Jealousy will get you nowhere. 
    Orinori

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • HeraseHerase Member RarePosts: 993
    Rouzuki said:
    Eldrach said:
    All this discussion about wether or not it's an MMO...The fact is. The business model has gone too far. The game, when released, won't be a good experience for anyone. There will be too many with high end ships from day one, it'll be a nightmare to balance. The game will either (a Feel like a cash grab in order to have a chance of "catching" up to the big spenders or b) The big spenders will feel cheated as it's too easy to catch up to their 1000 dollar ships.

    I see no way this will be a clean experience :/
    I always expected for case B. Pledging should have never been about buying a significant advantage over other players before the game even released. It should have only ever been about donating to the project to ensure its completion/improvement.
    Would disagree as we have no idea if there will be advantages. Not saying what you're saying is wrong in terms of donating, but I think claiming the pledges are about paying for advantages is wrong at this point.

    If they are able to achieve what they want, I don't see how any player on day one will be able to even fly their bought ship for every long or do anything that would ruin the experience for others.

    They're going to need to re-fuel, repair and buy components, which I would guess is going to be stupidly more expensive than your starter ship. I'm sure people could try, but I would think that would put you at a complete disadvantage trying to put the little to no money you start of with into a expensive or flashy ship.

    Also with the land claim, by the time people have worked out the best locations, I would think most people would have the option to claim already.

    I could be all wrong, like I said we have no idea. until we can test it, it's all guessing at this point. 

    So for me, I couldn't really call it a bad model, as we have no idea, but if the problem is that we have no idea and people are pouring money into, then that to me seems to be an overall crowdfunding problem, not a singular game problem.




  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 3,002
    CrazKanuk said:
    Kind of a re-defining of the word "prestigious", that is unless we call every award given by a random website "prestigious". I haven't seen anything given out by MMORPG.com labeled as "prestigious". It's not even an award given by a collective of industry experts, it's voted by fans, lol. 

    That being said, *shocker* yes, Star Citizen is still a polarizing topic. Check here just about any day of the week. 

    As far as models go, it's made somewhere approaching $180 million from fans without delivering anything but a rough alpha. To me, from a business perspective, that's pretty much as good as it gets. Jealousy will get you nowhere. 
    Somehow, I doubt those fans who gave CIG 180 million would be fine if CIG stopped where they are today, saying "thanks for services rendered", so no it's not as good as it gets when it comes to business models.
    kikoodutroa8

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance

  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    CrazKanuk said:
    Kind of a re-defining of the word "prestigious", that is unless we call every award given by a random website "prestigious". I haven't seen anything given out by MMORPG.com labeled as "prestigious". It's not even an award given by a collective of industry experts, it's voted by fans, lol. 

    That being said, *shocker* yes, Star Citizen is still a polarizing topic. Check here just about any day of the week. 

    As far as models go, it's made somewhere approaching $180 million from fans without delivering anything but a rough alpha. To me, from a business perspective, that's pretty much as good as it gets. Jealousy will get you nowhere. 
    I think people should 'pledge' 180 million to give you a course on sarcasm.  That's a good cause!
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    CrazKanuk said:
    Kind of a re-defining of the word "prestigious", that is unless we call every award given by a random website "prestigious". I haven't seen anything given out by MMORPG.com labeled as "prestigious". It's not even an award given by a collective of industry experts, it's voted by fans, lol. 

    That being said, *shocker* yes, Star Citizen is still a polarizing topic. Check here just about any day of the week. 

    As far as models go, it's made somewhere approaching $180 million from fans without delivering anything but a rough alpha. To me, from a business perspective, that's pretty much as good as it gets. Jealousy will get you nowhere. 
    Somehow, I doubt those fans who gave CIG 180 million would be fine if CIG stopped where they are today, saying "thanks for services rendered", so no it's not as good as it gets when it comes to business models.

    This is true, and I think that they are teetering dangerously close to that tipping point where people begin to jump off the bandwagon. I mean if they REALLY want to sell some shit. If they REALLY want to make some money, then releasing the game is the next step. I mean we're talking multiples of 10 upon release, because the REAL whales are interested in owning something that matters, and being awesome in a beta, nevermind an alpha, just doesn't matter. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,497
    CrazKanuk said:
    Kind of a re-defining of the word "prestigious", that is unless we call every award given by a random website "prestigious". I haven't seen anything given out by MMORPG.com labeled as "prestigious". It's not even an award given by a collective of industry experts, it's voted by fans, lol.
    The use of the word prestigious was sarcastic. An award from a random website on the internet is about as useful as a list of top 10 games from some guy on one of Japan's trains at rush hour, adding prestigious to the title was to make something silly even sillier.

    To be fair the 'award' was from the staff of the site, a separate poll which has nothing to do with the award was by the fans.
    CrazKanuk
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    CrazKanuk said:
    Kind of a re-defining of the word "prestigious", that is unless we call every award given by a random website "prestigious". I haven't seen anything given out by MMORPG.com labeled as "prestigious". It's not even an award given by a collective of industry experts, it's voted by fans, lol. 

    That being said, *shocker* yes, Star Citizen is still a polarizing topic. Check here just about any day of the week. 

    As far as models go, it's made somewhere approaching $180 million from fans without delivering anything but a rough alpha. To me, from a business perspective, that's pretty much as good as it gets. Jealousy will get you nowhere. 
    Somehow, I doubt those fans who gave CIG 180 million would be fine if CIG stopped where they are today, saying "thanks for services rendered", so no it's not as good as it gets when it comes to business models.
    Would be upset but would also totally understand that it was the risk I bought into and it was worth every penny. Just the same view that every other backer should have.
    kikoodutroa8
  • sgelsgel Member EpicPosts: 2,197
    edited December 2017
    I'd totally understand as well if you get 170mil of do-as-you-please cash and manage to screw up. That would take exceptional talent.
    Orinori

    ..Cake..

  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    edited December 2017
    Orinori said:

    Would be upset but would also totally understand that it was the risk I bought into and it was worth every penny. Just the same view that every other backer should have.
    Yea, that $35.00 you said you contributed died valiantly for a just cause.  Your sacrifice will be remembered.
    kikoodutroa8Kefo
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Tiamat64 said:
    Orinori said:

    Would be upset but would also totally understand that it was the risk I bought into and it was worth every penny. Just the same view that every other backer should have.
    Yea, that $35.00 you said you contributed died valiantly for a just cause.  Your sacrifice will be remembered.
    Thank you for your kind words. But nothing died.

Sign In or Register to comment.