Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Curiosity ..

123578

Comments

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,235
    Do you really think Frontier Developments would make such an extensive annual report available to the public if they did not have to ? (mandatory for a company on the London stock exchange)

    If you think they would, you are naive.

    There is a lot of manhours behind such a report ... which translates into cost. Money you could put to better use elsewhere if you do not have to create such a report. Money that you could use to pay their code monkeys a higher salary for all the crunch time and blood/sweat/tears moments in game development. Nah, who am i kidding ? This is a company on the London stock exchange ... that is money better handed out as profit to the stockholders, of course !


    Have fun
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,497
    Erillion said:
    If you think they would, you are naive.

    There is a lot of manhours behind such a report ... which translates into cost. Money you could put to better use elsewhere if you do not have to create such a report. Money that you could use to pay their code monkeys a higher salary for all the crunch time and blood/sweat/tears moments in game development.
    I think the naivety here is believing that extra cash will go to the code monkeys as wages... :)

    Erillion said:
    Nah, who am i kidding ? This is a company on the London stock exchange ... that is money better handed out as profit to the stockholders, of course !

    Ah yes, the big, bad studio stiffing it's customers just to line their own pockets... all on the back of their £3 cosmetics, meanwhile the studio fleecing people with $700 in game items are only charging that because it's for the good of the backers....
    IceAge
  • sgelsgel Member EpicPosts: 2,197
    Professional goal-post moving by Erillion yet again.
    Gotta level up that defense!

    Extra dose of irony by him dictating where to better use money as an argument for defending CIG.
    CIG... out of all gaming companies out there.. CIG.. in a talk about the proper use of money.


    How much face-palming can one face withstand?
    IceAge

    ..Cake..

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    edited January 2018
    gervaise1 said:
    Employee numbers, especially when they are trying to hide things, is a very misleading number in accounting.  Now, employees with health benefits, that is a good number.  Would they ever release that?  The answer is as simple as: will SC deliver on their promises - no.  (unfortunately)
    The numbers are identical in Germany and the UK; its a non-issue.

    What numbers are you referring to?  And why would it make a difference if they are the same?  An employee, especially a contract employee, tells us nothing.  Small businesses hire ten, fifty, sometimes even hundreds of contract employees every year.  It doesn't mean that those employees have the same efficiency or output of a full time employee.  

    That is what I said earlier.  Show me numbers of employees with health benefits (if in America).  If you are in Germany, show me the number of employees that are unionized and working full time (according to the union) for this company.  UK, I do not know how to measure.  But, in the US, that is definitely the way to measure a company's input/output.
    As you do not know about the UK: employees and employers pay "national health insurance" to the government. So when the LSE (London stock exchange) report listed employee numbers the fact that it did ot list "employees with health insurance" makes no difference. There is more detail but suffice to say "a good number" for the UK studio is the published number.

    Edit: and having worked in the US (as well as UK and Germany!) I would disagree about your US statement. Its a way and it may be a good way but it might not be.
  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 3,007
    Erillion said:
    Do you really think Frontier Developments would make such an extensive annual report available to the public if they did not have to ? (mandatory for a company on the London stock exchange)

    If you think they would, you are naive.

    There is a lot of manhours behind such a report ... which translates into cost. Money you could put to better use elsewhere if you do not have to create such a report. Money that you could use to pay their code monkeys a higher salary for all the crunch time and blood/sweat/tears moments in game development. Nah, who am i kidding ? This is a company on the London stock exchange ... that is money better handed out as profit to the stockholders, of course !


    Have fun
    I would agree with you, and normally it wouldn't be a big deal, but as you've fondly pointed out in the past CIG holds a GWR for crowdfunding.  $10 million is a lot of money.  ~$180 million is more than a lot.

    Yes, it is dwarfed by scandals like Madoff, Enron, and others that have necessitated legislature bearing out Form 10-K, but if anything history has shown companies raking in millions can do some very shady things if left unchecked.  It doesn't have to mean a reduction in profits or the bottom line; it's just about accountability.

    OK, I'm stepping off the soap box now.
    laserit

    "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

  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    sgel said:
    Professional goal-post moving by Erillion yet again.
    Gotta level up that defense!

    Extra dose of irony by him dictating where to better use money as an argument for defending CIG.
    CIG... out of all gaming companies out there.. CIG.. in a talk about the proper use of money.


    How much face-palming can one face withstand?
    The face stopped looking like a face a while ago and more like paper mache that has been sprayed with a garden hose for an hour and then stepped on repeatedly when it comes to goal post moving by defenders
  • penandpaperpenandpaper Member UncommonPosts: 174
    CrazKanuk said:
    Erillion said:
    >>>
    Again, it has nothing to do with private or public.  It has to do with transparency.  And when you take over 100 million dollars of other people's money, then you should be transparent.  Hence: "Hey guys, we'd like you to know we spent another 400,000 hiring two more programmers.  There names are John and Sally.  They will be helping us with the planetary systems and bug decoding."
    >>>

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of monthly SC reports, where "John and Sally" have been introduced time and time again in the studio reports.

    Me seems you have never seen a "Jump Point" Magazine where the teams were introduced in many-page detail, in their own words.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of "Dev Talk" and "Dev Happy Hour" v-blogs, where various employees have been introduced.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of the "10 Questions to XXX" (XXX not being the Chairman) where even more people were talking.

    Me seems you may want to check on the CIG/RSI/Foundry job ads, were new people are being searched for ... and people ask the company about it (e.g. LinkedIn) and get answers.


    So ... CIG has been doing that for years ... but you seem to be not aware of it.


    Have fun
    Just like EQNext did, right?

    I want him to publish accurate numbers that can be backed up by tax filings.  That's all.  That is transparency.  


    Well you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and I'll bet I can predict which will fill up first. 

    Your idea of transparency is unrealistic. You show me a handful of game companies with the level of transparency that you're talking about. See, the nice thing about transparency is that is what we call a moving goalpost. I tell you what you want to hear, and then you tell me I'm not being completely transparent because I'm hiding the truth about my waist size. Honestly, it's arguments like this one you're making that actually retards the transparency movement because who the FUCK in their right mind would want to claim to be transparent when you've got people with ridiculously distorted perspectives of what that should look like? Honestly, comments like these do NOTHING to progress the transparency movement in game development. 

    One, I'm stealing you hand quote - hilarious!

    Two, I don't want transparency for other game companies.  Know why?  Because the games I buy are funded by the company, not the public.  That is the difference.  I can log into my city's budget and see where all the money goes.  Why?  Because we fund them.  I can go to public records and find out how much our local library spent on every little thing: books, computers, a new roof.  Know why?  The public funds them.  I asked for documentation of number of employees and the resources used for them.  That's what I have asked for this entire post.  I said without it, it is easy to hide.  So moving goalposts I am not.

    Now, if you want to make the differentiation between publicly funded and publicly invested, I would listen, and most likely, agree.  

    But transparency implies exactly that - being transparent, especially about investing and spending.  I suppose It also applies to game dynamics.  But, that's a different debate.  
  • penandpaperpenandpaper Member UncommonPosts: 174
    gervaise1 said:
    gervaise1 said:
    Employee numbers, especially when they are trying to hide things, is a very misleading number in accounting.  Now, employees with health benefits, that is a good number.  Would they ever release that?  The answer is as simple as: will SC deliver on their promises - no.  (unfortunately)
    The numbers are identical in Germany and the UK; its a non-issue.

    What numbers are you referring to?  And why would it make a difference if they are the same?  An employee, especially a contract employee, tells us nothing.  Small businesses hire ten, fifty, sometimes even hundreds of contract employees every year.  It doesn't mean that those employees have the same efficiency or output of a full time employee.  

    That is what I said earlier.  Show me numbers of employees with health benefits (if in America).  If you are in Germany, show me the number of employees that are unionized and working full time (according to the union) for this company.  UK, I do not know how to measure.  But, in the US, that is definitely the way to measure a company's input/output.
    As you do not know about the UK: employees and employers pay "national health insurance" to the government. So when the LSE (London stock exchange) report listed employee numbers the fact that it did ot list "employees with health insurance" makes no difference. There is more detail but suffice to say "a good number" for the UK studio is the published number.

    Edit: and having worked in the US (as well as UK and Germany!) I would disagree about your US statement. Its a way and it may be a good way but it might not be.

    Fair enough.  I will cede to your knowledge because you have experience working in all those places.  But, I do have experience working in the US.  And, while it may not be the best unit of measurement, it is pretty darn accurate.  A lot more accurate that just seeing a list of employees, some of whom may simply supply an hour of voice acting or cleaning services.  
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    CrazKanuk said:
    Erillion said:
    >>>
    Again, it has nothing to do with private or public.  It has to do with transparency.  And when you take over 100 million dollars of other people's money, then you should be transparent.  Hence: "Hey guys, we'd like you to know we spent another 400,000 hiring two more programmers.  There names are John and Sally.  They will be helping us with the planetary systems and bug decoding."
    >>>

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of monthly SC reports, where "John and Sally" have been introduced time and time again in the studio reports.

    Me seems you have never seen a "Jump Point" Magazine where the teams were introduced in many-page detail, in their own words.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of "Dev Talk" and "Dev Happy Hour" v-blogs, where various employees have been introduced.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of the "10 Questions to XXX" (XXX not being the Chairman) where even more people were talking.

    Me seems you may want to check on the CIG/RSI/Foundry job ads, were new people are being searched for ... and people ask the company about it (e.g. LinkedIn) and get answers.


    So ... CIG has been doing that for years ... but you seem to be not aware of it.


    Have fun
    Just like EQNext did, right?

    I want him to publish accurate numbers that can be backed up by tax filings.  That's all.  That is transparency.  


    Well you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and I'll bet I can predict which will fill up first. 

    Your idea of transparency is unrealistic. You show me a handful of game companies with the level of transparency that you're talking about. See, the nice thing about transparency is that is what we call a moving goalpost. I tell you what you want to hear, and then you tell me I'm not being completely transparent because I'm hiding the truth about my waist size. Honestly, it's arguments like this one you're making that actually retards the transparency movement because who the FUCK in their right mind would want to claim to be transparent when you've got people with ridiculously distorted perspectives of what that should look like? Honestly, comments like these do NOTHING to progress the transparency movement in game development. 

    One, I'm stealing you hand quote - hilarious!

    Two, I don't want transparency for other game companies.  Know why?  Because the games I buy are funded by the company, not the public.  That is the difference.  I can log into my city's budget and see where all the money goes.  Why?  Because we fund them.  I can go to public records and find out how much our local library spent on every little thing: books, computers, a new roof.  Know why?  The public funds them.  I asked for documentation of number of employees and the resources used for them.  That's what I have asked for this entire post.  I said without it, it is easy to hide.  So moving goalposts I am not.

    Now, if you want to make the differentiation between publicly funded and publicly invested, I would listen, and most likely, agree.  

    But transparency implies exactly that - being transparent, especially about investing and spending.  I suppose It also applies to game dynamics.  But, that's a different debate.  


    So maybe this is the sticking point. You're not wrong. However, regardless of how they're funded, this is a private company. So we're talking about government organizations which are publicly funded through taxes (non-voluntary) versus a company which is a private entity with zero responsibility to the public, which is publicly funded using donations (voluntary). 

    Regardless of the funding, though, we're talking about a vast difference in the level of responsibility. We aren't even talking about public COMPANY versus private COMPANY. We're talking about government agencies versus a private company. I mean, I love the tangent that you're trying to draw, but it just isn't realistic. Let me ask you this, so do you feel that any company that takes a loan from the government, or bank, or any agency should be required to be open with their books and fully-transparent with the public? I don't, but that's essentially what you're asking for. 

    I think that the biggest thing to remember is that when you crowdfund something, you're not investing in that company, they aren't a publicly-traded company, you are giving your money to Joe and Joe is going to do with your money what Joe wants and, generally speaking, he doesn't have a legal responsibility to you at all, except to try to deliver what he said he was going to deliver, whether that's potato salad or a video game. 

    So the fact that a company like CIG publishes how much money they're making is actually about as transparent as it gets. Let's face facts, how many arguments are rooted in how much money they've made versus what they've delivered? How much of a headache as that caused them? Can you appreciate how they might not want to be any more transparent? 

    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
    ----------------

  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,318
    edited February 2018
    CrazKanuk said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    Erillion said:
    >>>
    Again, it has nothing to do with private or public.  It has to do with transparency.  And when you take over 100 million dollars of other people's money, then you should be transparent.  Hence: "Hey guys, we'd like you to know we spent another 400,000 hiring two more programmers.  There names are John and Sally.  They will be helping us with the planetary systems and bug decoding."
    >>>

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of monthly SC reports, where "John and Sally" have been introduced time and time again in the studio reports.

    Me seems you have never seen a "Jump Point" Magazine where the teams were introduced in many-page detail, in their own words.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of "Dev Talk" and "Dev Happy Hour" v-blogs, where various employees have been introduced.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of the "10 Questions to XXX" (XXX not being the Chairman) where even more people were talking.

    Me seems you may want to check on the CIG/RSI/Foundry job ads, were new people are being searched for ... and people ask the company about it (e.g. LinkedIn) and get answers.


    So ... CIG has been doing that for years ... but you seem to be not aware of it.


    Have fun
    Just like EQNext did, right?

    I want him to publish accurate numbers that can be backed up by tax filings.  That's all.  That is transparency.  


    Well you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and I'll bet I can predict which will fill up first. 

    Your idea of transparency is unrealistic. You show me a handful of game companies with the level of transparency that you're talking about. See, the nice thing about transparency is that is what we call a moving goalpost. I tell you what you want to hear, and then you tell me I'm not being completely transparent because I'm hiding the truth about my waist size. Honestly, it's arguments like this one you're making that actually retards the transparency movement because who the FUCK in their right mind would want to claim to be transparent when you've got people with ridiculously distorted perspectives of what that should look like? Honestly, comments like these do NOTHING to progress the transparency movement in game development. 

    One, I'm stealing you hand quote - hilarious!

    Two, I don't want transparency for other game companies.  Know why?  Because the games I buy are funded by the company, not the public.  That is the difference.  I can log into my city's budget and see where all the money goes.  Why?  Because we fund them.  I can go to public records and find out how much our local library spent on every little thing: books, computers, a new roof.  Know why?  The public funds them.  I asked for documentation of number of employees and the resources used for them.  That's what I have asked for this entire post.  I said without it, it is easy to hide.  So moving goalposts I am not.

    Now, if you want to make the differentiation between publicly funded and publicly invested, I would listen, and most likely, agree.  

    But transparency implies exactly that - being transparent, especially about investing and spending.  I suppose It also applies to game dynamics.  But, that's a different debate.  


    So maybe this is the sticking point. You're not wrong. However, regardless of how they're funded, this is a private company. So we're talking about government organizations which are publicly funded through taxes (non-voluntary) versus a company which is a private entity with zero responsibility to the public, which is publicly funded using donations (voluntary). 

    Regardless of the funding, though, we're talking about a vast difference in the level of responsibility. We aren't even talking about public COMPANY versus private COMPANY. We're talking about government agencies versus a private company. I mean, I love the tangent that you're trying to draw, but it just isn't realistic. Let me ask you this, so do you feel that any company that takes a loan from the government, or bank, or any agency should be required to be open with their books and fully-transparent with the public? I don't, but that's essentially what you're asking for. 

    I think that the biggest thing to remember is that when you crowdfund something, you're not investing in that company, they aren't a publicly-traded company, you are giving your money to Joe and Joe is going to do with your money what Joe wants and, generally speaking, he doesn't have a legal responsibility to you at all, except to try to deliver what he said he was going to deliver, whether that's potato salad or a video game. 

    So the fact that a company like CIG publishes how much money they're making is actually about as transparent as it gets. Let's face facts, how many arguments are rooted in how much money they've made versus what they've delivered? How much of a headache as that caused them? Can you appreciate how they might not want to be any more transparent? 
    This is the thing though

    Show a commercial of starving kids in Africa and you are required by law to show your donors where the money goes.

    Show a commercial of cool looking spaceships and you are not required by law to show your donors where the money goes.

    IMHO it should not matter what your soliciting the funds for, the rules should be the same.

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • HashbrickHashbrick Member RarePosts: 1,851
    This is a great resource that is unclouded by bullshit.  https://starcitizentracker.github.io/

    When you look at the completed list and then yet to be implemented/stagnant list it is baffling how little they got done in the years this game has been worked on.  They have a ridiculous amount of money, a ridiculous amount of resources, and yet work slower than an indie dev.
    BabuinixMaxBaconIceAgeDarkpigeon
    [[ DEAD ]] - Funny - I deleted my account on the site using the cancel account button.  Forum user is separate and still exists with no way of deleting it. Delete it admins. Do it, this ends now.
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    Erillion said:
    >>>
    Again, it has nothing to do with private or public.  It has to do with transparency.  And when you take over 100 million dollars of other people's money, then you should be transparent.  Hence: "Hey guys, we'd like you to know we spent another 400,000 hiring two more programmers.  There names are John and Sally.  They will be helping us with the planetary systems and bug decoding."
    >>>

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of monthly SC reports, where "John and Sally" have been introduced time and time again in the studio reports.

    Me seems you have never seen a "Jump Point" Magazine where the teams were introduced in many-page detail, in their own words.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of "Dev Talk" and "Dev Happy Hour" v-blogs, where various employees have been introduced.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of the "10 Questions to XXX" (XXX not being the Chairman) where even more people were talking.

    Me seems you may want to check on the CIG/RSI/Foundry job ads, were new people are being searched for ... and people ask the company about it (e.g. LinkedIn) and get answers.


    So ... CIG has been doing that for years ... but you seem to be not aware of it.


    Have fun
    Just like EQNext did, right?

    I want him to publish accurate numbers that can be backed up by tax filings.  That's all.  That is transparency.  


    Well you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and I'll bet I can predict which will fill up first. 

    Your idea of transparency is unrealistic. You show me a handful of game companies with the level of transparency that you're talking about. See, the nice thing about transparency is that is what we call a moving goalpost. I tell you what you want to hear, and then you tell me I'm not being completely transparent because I'm hiding the truth about my waist size. Honestly, it's arguments like this one you're making that actually retards the transparency movement because who the FUCK in their right mind would want to claim to be transparent when you've got people with ridiculously distorted perspectives of what that should look like? Honestly, comments like these do NOTHING to progress the transparency movement in game development. 

    One, I'm stealing you hand quote - hilarious!

    Two, I don't want transparency for other game companies.  Know why?  Because the games I buy are funded by the company, not the public.  That is the difference.  I can log into my city's budget and see where all the money goes.  Why?  Because we fund them.  I can go to public records and find out how much our local library spent on every little thing: books, computers, a new roof.  Know why?  The public funds them.  I asked for documentation of number of employees and the resources used for them.  That's what I have asked for this entire post.  I said without it, it is easy to hide.  So moving goalposts I am not.

    Now, if you want to make the differentiation between publicly funded and publicly invested, I would listen, and most likely, agree.  

    But transparency implies exactly that - being transparent, especially about investing and spending.  I suppose It also applies to game dynamics.  But, that's a different debate.  


    So maybe this is the sticking point. You're not wrong. However, regardless of how they're funded, this is a private company. So we're talking about government organizations which are publicly funded through taxes (non-voluntary) versus a company which is a private entity with zero responsibility to the public, which is publicly funded using donations (voluntary). 

    Regardless of the funding, though, we're talking about a vast difference in the level of responsibility. We aren't even talking about public COMPANY versus private COMPANY. We're talking about government agencies versus a private company. I mean, I love the tangent that you're trying to draw, but it just isn't realistic. Let me ask you this, so do you feel that any company that takes a loan from the government, or bank, or any agency should be required to be open with their books and fully-transparent with the public? I don't, but that's essentially what you're asking for. 

    I think that the biggest thing to remember is that when you crowdfund something, you're not investing in that company, they aren't a publicly-traded company, you are giving your money to Joe and Joe is going to do with your money what Joe wants and, generally speaking, he doesn't have a legal responsibility to you at all, except to try to deliver what he said he was going to deliver, whether that's potato salad or a video game. 

    So the fact that a company like CIG publishes how much money they're making is actually about as transparent as it gets. Let's face facts, how many arguments are rooted in how much money they've made versus what they've delivered? How much of a headache as that caused them? Can you appreciate how they might not want to be any more transparent? 
    This is the thing though

    Show a commercial of starving kids in Africa and you are required by law to show your donors where the money goes.

    Show a commercial of cool looking spaceships and you are not required by law to show your donors where the money goes.

    IMHO it should not matter what your soliciting the funds for, the rules should be the same.


    Well, again, it's not a charity, it's a business. I understand what you're wishing for but, again, I'll say that you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which fills up first. 

    Hey, you own a company, right? I'm assuming that you take some money up-front since you're doing custom work. So should you have to open your books to anyone who gives you money based on a promise of work? Do you think they should know what you pay yourself annually? Come on! 

    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
    ----------------

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Hashbrick said:
    This is a great resource that is unclouded by bullshit.  https://starcitizentracker.github.io/

    When you look at the completed list and then yet to be implemented/stagnant list it is baffling how little they got done in the years this game has been worked on.  They have a ridiculous amount of money, a ridiculous amount of resources, and yet work slower than an indie dev.

    Actually, "unclouded" is a bit of a stretch. It's been well-documented that the people who maintain this are vocal opponents of Star Citizen, in general. Also, the list is littered with "want" items, not things that are/were committed to at any point in time. 

    Honestly, you are more accurate to use the CIG tracker. 

    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
    ----------------

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,235
    Hashbrick said:
    This is a great resource that is unclouded by bullshit.  https://starcitizentracker.github.io/

    When you look at the completed list and then yet to be implemented/stagnant list it is baffling how little they got done in the years this game has been worked on.  They have a ridiculous amount of money, a ridiculous amount of resources, and yet work slower than an indie dev.
    You are a few months late in discussing that link and why the list there is inaccurate.

    Scroll back a few months in this mmorpg subforum to read dozens of posts on that one.


    Have fun
  • HashbrickHashbrick Member RarePosts: 1,851
    Erillion said:
    Hashbrick said:
    This is a great resource that is unclouded by bullshit.  https://starcitizentracker.github.io/

    When you look at the completed list and then yet to be implemented/stagnant list it is baffling how little they got done in the years this game has been worked on.  They have a ridiculous amount of money, a ridiculous amount of resources, and yet work slower than an indie dev.
    You are a few months late in discussing that link and why the list there is inaccurate.

    Scroll back a few months in this mmorpg subforum to read dozens of posts on that one.


    Have fun
    Of course any fanboi would fight against such resource, you can call it what you want but it is well documented, even to the point that it is the exact timestamp of a developer video where they talk about the "feature".

    Just know this, your idol likes to run his mouth and talk a big game with very little to show for it.  Is that worth something to stand for? You be you Erillion.
    MaxBaconDarkpigeon
    [[ DEAD ]] - Funny - I deleted my account on the site using the cancel account button.  Forum user is separate and still exists with no way of deleting it. Delete it admins. Do it, this ends now.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,235
    edited February 2018
    Hashbrick said:
     Is that worth something to stand for?
    Star Citizen is worth standing for. In my opinion even worth a standing applause.

    I do not care how long it takes. It is done when its done.


    Have fun
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Hashbrick said:
    Erillion said:
    Hashbrick said:
    This is a great resource that is unclouded by bullshit.  https://starcitizentracker.github.io/

    When you look at the completed list and then yet to be implemented/stagnant list it is baffling how little they got done in the years this game has been worked on.  They have a ridiculous amount of money, a ridiculous amount of resources, and yet work slower than an indie dev.
    You are a few months late in discussing that link and why the list there is inaccurate.

    Scroll back a few months in this mmorpg subforum to read dozens of posts on that one.


    Have fun
    Of course any fanboi would fight against such resource, you can call it what you want but it is well documented, even to the point that it is the exact timestamp of a developer video where they talk about the "feature".

    Just know this, your idol likes to run his mouth and talk a big game with very little to show for it.  Is that worth something to stand for? You be you Erillion.

    I can't distinguish which items are Must, Should, and Nice to Haves. Can you point that to me? The difference between you and Erillion is only that you exist on two extremes. Your inability to accept that the truth likely exists somewhere closer to the middle of the two tools shows that you are just as biased. You can reference things until you're blue in the face, but I have never heard of a project manager being held to a quote made by the CEO of a company on what they're speculating the future MIGHT look like. The problem with the source you provide is that they consider everything said in any video or interview to be part of the product specification. That's just not the way it works in the real world. You show me this tool with references to documented features that the developer has committed to developing for their initial release and the tool would look much different. 

    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
    ----------------

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,235
    CrazKanuk said:

    I can't distinguish which items are Must, Should, and Nice to Haves. Can you point that to me? The difference between you and Erillion is only that you exist on two extremes. Your inability to accept that the truth likely exists somewhere closer to the middle of the two tools shows that you are just as biased. You can reference things until you're blue in the face, but I have never heard of a project manager being held to a quote made by the CEO of a company on what they're speculating the future MIGHT look like. The problem with the source you provide is that they consider everything said in any video or interview to be part of the product specification. That's just not the way it works in the real world. You show me this tool with references to documented features that the developer has committed to developing for their initial release and the tool would look much different. 
    For reference .... my benchmarks are easy to check.

    Kickstarter and Stretch goal list.

    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen?lang=de


    Have fun


  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited February 2018
    CrazKanuk said:
    Hashbrick said:
    Erillion said:
    Hashbrick said:
    This is a great resource that is unclouded by bullshit.  https://starcitizentracker.github.io/

    When you look at the completed list and then yet to be implemented/stagnant list it is baffling how little they got done in the years this game has been worked on.  They have a ridiculous amount of money, a ridiculous amount of resources, and yet work slower than an indie dev.
    You are a few months late in discussing that link and why the list there is inaccurate.

    Scroll back a few months in this mmorpg subforum to read dozens of posts on that one.


    Have fun
    Of course any fanboi would fight against such resource, you can call it what you want but it is well documented, even to the point that it is the exact timestamp of a developer video where they talk about the "feature".

    Just know this, your idol likes to run his mouth and talk a big game with very little to show for it.  Is that worth something to stand for? You be you Erillion.

    I can't distinguish which items are Must, Should, and Nice to Haves. Can you point that to me? The difference between you and Erillion is only that you exist on two extremes. Your inability to accept that the truth likely exists somewhere closer to the middle of the two tools shows that you are just as biased. You can reference things until you're blue in the face, but I have never heard of a project manager being held to a quote made by the CEO of a company on what they're speculating the future MIGHT look like. The problem with the source you provide is that they consider everything said in any video or interview to be part of the product specification. That's just not the way it works in the real world. You show me this tool with references to documented features that the developer has committed to developing for their initial release and the tool would look much different. 
    He's not a regular CEO or project manager.  He's a crowdfunded project manager.  Comparing it to a regular CEO position in a private company with investors is not a fair comparison.

    If they mentioned features planned, and this was done to garner additional funds, either by intent or by effect, I would absolutely hold their feet to the fire for it.  All of those comments play into a consumer's decision to buy into the vision.

    Any CEO spinning BS to their investors just to get them to reinvest or attract new investors likely won't have investor support for long.  Likely why most CEOs have the sense enough to know they shouldn't spout off every grand idea they have just because some journalist or customer asks.
    Turrican187

    image
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,318
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    Erillion said:
    >>>
    Again, it has nothing to do with private or public.  It has to do with transparency.  And when you take over 100 million dollars of other people's money, then you should be transparent.  Hence: "Hey guys, we'd like you to know we spent another 400,000 hiring two more programmers.  There names are John and Sally.  They will be helping us with the planetary systems and bug decoding."
    >>>

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of monthly SC reports, where "John and Sally" have been introduced time and time again in the studio reports.

    Me seems you have never seen a "Jump Point" Magazine where the teams were introduced in many-page detail, in their own words.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of "Dev Talk" and "Dev Happy Hour" v-blogs, where various employees have been introduced.

    Me seems you have missed A LOT of the "10 Questions to XXX" (XXX not being the Chairman) where even more people were talking.

    Me seems you may want to check on the CIG/RSI/Foundry job ads, were new people are being searched for ... and people ask the company about it (e.g. LinkedIn) and get answers.


    So ... CIG has been doing that for years ... but you seem to be not aware of it.


    Have fun
    Just like EQNext did, right?

    I want him to publish accurate numbers that can be backed up by tax filings.  That's all.  That is transparency.  


    Well you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and I'll bet I can predict which will fill up first. 

    Your idea of transparency is unrealistic. You show me a handful of game companies with the level of transparency that you're talking about. See, the nice thing about transparency is that is what we call a moving goalpost. I tell you what you want to hear, and then you tell me I'm not being completely transparent because I'm hiding the truth about my waist size. Honestly, it's arguments like this one you're making that actually retards the transparency movement because who the FUCK in their right mind would want to claim to be transparent when you've got people with ridiculously distorted perspectives of what that should look like? Honestly, comments like these do NOTHING to progress the transparency movement in game development. 

    One, I'm stealing you hand quote - hilarious!

    Two, I don't want transparency for other game companies.  Know why?  Because the games I buy are funded by the company, not the public.  That is the difference.  I can log into my city's budget and see where all the money goes.  Why?  Because we fund them.  I can go to public records and find out how much our local library spent on every little thing: books, computers, a new roof.  Know why?  The public funds them.  I asked for documentation of number of employees and the resources used for them.  That's what I have asked for this entire post.  I said without it, it is easy to hide.  So moving goalposts I am not.

    Now, if you want to make the differentiation between publicly funded and publicly invested, I would listen, and most likely, agree.  

    But transparency implies exactly that - being transparent, especially about investing and spending.  I suppose It also applies to game dynamics.  But, that's a different debate.  


    So maybe this is the sticking point. You're not wrong. However, regardless of how they're funded, this is a private company. So we're talking about government organizations which are publicly funded through taxes (non-voluntary) versus a company which is a private entity with zero responsibility to the public, which is publicly funded using donations (voluntary). 

    Regardless of the funding, though, we're talking about a vast difference in the level of responsibility. We aren't even talking about public COMPANY versus private COMPANY. We're talking about government agencies versus a private company. I mean, I love the tangent that you're trying to draw, but it just isn't realistic. Let me ask you this, so do you feel that any company that takes a loan from the government, or bank, or any agency should be required to be open with their books and fully-transparent with the public? I don't, but that's essentially what you're asking for. 

    I think that the biggest thing to remember is that when you crowdfund something, you're not investing in that company, they aren't a publicly-traded company, you are giving your money to Joe and Joe is going to do with your money what Joe wants and, generally speaking, he doesn't have a legal responsibility to you at all, except to try to deliver what he said he was going to deliver, whether that's potato salad or a video game. 

    So the fact that a company like CIG publishes how much money they're making is actually about as transparent as it gets. Let's face facts, how many arguments are rooted in how much money they've made versus what they've delivered? How much of a headache as that caused them? Can you appreciate how they might not want to be any more transparent? 
    This is the thing though

    Show a commercial of starving kids in Africa and you are required by law to show your donors where the money goes.

    Show a commercial of cool looking spaceships and you are not required by law to show your donors where the money goes.

    IMHO it should not matter what your soliciting the funds for, the rules should be the same.


    Well, again, it's not a charity, it's a business. I understand what you're wishing for but, again, I'll say that you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which fills up first. 

    Hey, you own a company, right? I'm assuming that you take some money up-front since you're doing custom work. So should you have to open your books to anyone who gives you money based on a promise of work? Do you think they should know what you pay yourself annually? Come on! 
    The naked truth is that Charities are business's too. 

    Actually I normally don't take money up front, the amount of defaults is minuscule and a cost of doing business. Accounts in good standing are net-30 and everyone else is cod. If a Joe Blow from whistle piss creek walked in wanting to make a $50k order. I'd want a credit check or they can supply the materials.

    Funny thing is that about five years ago I started taking credit cards (hated the idea of giving up the 2%) my receivables dropped by about 2/3

    99% of my business is with other business's, 1% is with the general public.  

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    CrazKanuk said:
    Hashbrick said:
    Erillion said:
    Hashbrick said:
    This is a great resource that is unclouded by bullshit.  https://starcitizentracker.github.io/

    When you look at the completed list and then yet to be implemented/stagnant list it is baffling how little they got done in the years this game has been worked on.  They have a ridiculous amount of money, a ridiculous amount of resources, and yet work slower than an indie dev.
    You are a few months late in discussing that link and why the list there is inaccurate.

    Scroll back a few months in this mmorpg subforum to read dozens of posts on that one.


    Have fun
    Of course any fanboi would fight against such resource, you can call it what you want but it is well documented, even to the point that it is the exact timestamp of a developer video where they talk about the "feature".

    Just know this, your idol likes to run his mouth and talk a big game with very little to show for it.  Is that worth something to stand for? You be you Erillion.

    I can't distinguish which items are Must, Should, and Nice to Haves. Can you point that to me? The difference between you and Erillion is only that you exist on two extremes. Your inability to accept that the truth likely exists somewhere closer to the middle of the two tools shows that you are just as biased. You can reference things until you're blue in the face, but I have never heard of a project manager being held to a quote made by the CEO of a company on what they're speculating the future MIGHT look like. The problem with the source you provide is that they consider everything said in any video or interview to be part of the product specification. That's just not the way it works in the real world. You show me this tool with references to documented features that the developer has committed to developing for their initial release and the tool would look much different. 
    He's not a regular CEO or project manager.  He's a crowdfunded project manager.  Comparing it to a regular CEO position in a private company with investors is not a fair comparison.

    If they mentioned features planned, and this was done to garner additional funds, either by intent or by effect, I would absolutely hold their feet to the fire for it.  All of those comments play into a consumer's decision to buy into the vision.

    Any CEO spinning BS to their investors just to get them to reinvest or attract new investors likely won't have investor support for long.  Likely why most CEOs have the sense enough to know they shouldn't spout off every grand idea they have just because some journalist or customer asks.


    I can appreciate the sensitivity being that this is a crowdfunded project, and one that's had so much money given to it (btw, if they never published that, we wouldn't know how much money they had, right?). That being said, there are promises made and broken every day in the industry. The only difference is that the microscope is on Star Citizen. 

    You are right, though, CR does have a tendency to open his mouth. It's not much different than Sean Murray, right? What's more, he actually showed in-game features that never made it to production, which only gives credence to this idea that shit gets canceled and loose-lipped employees almost always sink the ship. 

    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
    ----------------

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:

    This is the thing though

    Show a commercial of starving kids in Africa and you are required by law to show your donors where the money goes.

    Show a commercial of cool looking spaceships and you are not required by law to show your donors where the money goes.

    IMHO it should not matter what your soliciting the funds for, the rules should be the same.


    Well, again, it's not a charity, it's a business. I understand what you're wishing for but, again, I'll say that you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which fills up first. 

    Hey, you own a company, right? I'm assuming that you take some money up-front since you're doing custom work. So should you have to open your books to anyone who gives you money based on a promise of work? Do you think they should know what you pay yourself annually? Come on! 
    The naked truth is that Charities are business's too. 

    Actually I normally don't take money up front, the amount of defaults is minuscule and a cost of doing business. Accounts in good standing are net-30 and everyone else is cod. If a Joe Blow from whistle piss creek walked in wanting to make a $50k order. I'd want a credit check or they can supply the materials.

    Funny thing is that about five years ago I started taking credit cards (hated the idea of giving up the 2%) my receivables dropped by about 2/3

    99% of my business is with other business's, 1% is with the general public.  


    I was just making an illustration. My guess is that if you were taking money up-front, as many B2Bs do, that you would not expect detailed knowledge of their books, employee salaries, operations, etc., etc. It's just not realistic. That is unless that becomes part of law, like charities and government. So if that's what people want, then petition for it. Until that time, though, it's a retarded argument. 

    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
    ----------------

  • HashbrickHashbrick Member RarePosts: 1,851
    CrazKanuk said:
    Hashbrick said:
    Erillion said:
    Hashbrick said:
    This is a great resource that is unclouded by bullshit.  https://starcitizentracker.github.io/

    When you look at the completed list and then yet to be implemented/stagnant list it is baffling how little they got done in the years this game has been worked on.  They have a ridiculous amount of money, a ridiculous amount of resources, and yet work slower than an indie dev.
    You are a few months late in discussing that link and why the list there is inaccurate.

    Scroll back a few months in this mmorpg subforum to read dozens of posts on that one.


    Have fun
    Of course any fanboi would fight against such resource, you can call it what you want but it is well documented, even to the point that it is the exact timestamp of a developer video where they talk about the "feature".

    Just know this, your idol likes to run his mouth and talk a big game with very little to show for it.  Is that worth something to stand for? You be you Erillion.

    I can't distinguish which items are Must, Should, and Nice to Haves. Can you point that to me? The difference between you and Erillion is only that you exist on two extremes. Your inability to accept that the truth likely exists somewhere closer to the middle of the two tools shows that you are just as biased. You can reference things until you're blue in the face, but I have never heard of a project manager being held to a quote made by the CEO of a company on what they're speculating the future MIGHT look like. The problem with the source you provide is that they consider everything said in any video or interview to be part of the product specification. That's just not the way it works in the real world. You show me this tool with references to documented features that the developer has committed to developing for their initial release and the tool would look much different. 
    Fair point however, this is Chris Roberts, the internet celebrity, the guy that came back with a wild imagination to the industry to claim his stake in glory once more.  His past accomplishments were only achieved by others that had straighten him out, kept him on course.  I'm not sure that is really there atm it seems like he is running loose and saying whatever he wants to say. He is the mascot and the target of the project to not document the words that come out of his mouth would be very wrong.  When he's sitting on 10 to manager shoot and yelling around about how black holes are going to be in the game then you hold him accountable to such.

    To that end I've been watching this for a very long time, I would like to see it succeed in some form or another but part of me wants to see Chris Roberts in legal trouble so that some law is tied into crowd funded projects such as documentation of where the money is going.  I can guarantee a lot of that money went into fancy things around the office that aren't even part of the game development, or ridiculous high paid salaries just cause they have so much cash to blow through.
    MaxBacon
    [[ DEAD ]] - Funny - I deleted my account on the site using the cancel account button.  Forum user is separate and still exists with no way of deleting it. Delete it admins. Do it, this ends now.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 7,275
    edited February 2018
    laserit said:
    IMHO it should not matter what your soliciting the funds for, the rules should be the same.
    That is ridiculous. You are comparing a charity to a company. Of course the rules are different... Charities have clear benefits and exclusions in the face of the law, what obviously requires that degree of transparency (and even with charities not all information is of public knowledge)
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    CrazKanuk said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    Hashbrick said:
    Erillion said:
    Hashbrick said:
    This is a great resource that is unclouded by bullshit.  https://starcitizentracker.github.io/

    When you look at the completed list and then yet to be implemented/stagnant list it is baffling how little they got done in the years this game has been worked on.  They have a ridiculous amount of money, a ridiculous amount of resources, and yet work slower than an indie dev.
    You are a few months late in discussing that link and why the list there is inaccurate.

    Scroll back a few months in this mmorpg subforum to read dozens of posts on that one.


    Have fun
    Of course any fanboi would fight against such resource, you can call it what you want but it is well documented, even to the point that it is the exact timestamp of a developer video where they talk about the "feature".

    Just know this, your idol likes to run his mouth and talk a big game with very little to show for it.  Is that worth something to stand for? You be you Erillion.

    I can't distinguish which items are Must, Should, and Nice to Haves. Can you point that to me? The difference between you and Erillion is only that you exist on two extremes. Your inability to accept that the truth likely exists somewhere closer to the middle of the two tools shows that you are just as biased. You can reference things until you're blue in the face, but I have never heard of a project manager being held to a quote made by the CEO of a company on what they're speculating the future MIGHT look like. The problem with the source you provide is that they consider everything said in any video or interview to be part of the product specification. That's just not the way it works in the real world. You show me this tool with references to documented features that the developer has committed to developing for their initial release and the tool would look much different. 
    He's not a regular CEO or project manager.  He's a crowdfunded project manager.  Comparing it to a regular CEO position in a private company with investors is not a fair comparison.

    If they mentioned features planned, and this was done to garner additional funds, either by intent or by effect, I would absolutely hold their feet to the fire for it.  All of those comments play into a consumer's decision to buy into the vision.

    Any CEO spinning BS to their investors just to get them to reinvest or attract new investors likely won't have investor support for long.  Likely why most CEOs have the sense enough to know they shouldn't spout off every grand idea they have just because some journalist or customer asks.


    I can appreciate the sensitivity being that this is a crowdfunded project, and one that's had so much money given to it (btw, if they never published that, we wouldn't know how much money they had, right?). That being said, there are promises made and broken every day in the industry. The only difference is that the microscope is on Star Citizen. 

    You are right, though, CR does have a tendency to open his mouth. It's not much different than Sean Murray, right? What's more, he actually showed in-game features that never made it to production, which only gives credence to this idea that shit gets canceled and loose-lipped employees almost always sink the ship. 
    Absolutely, and No Man's Sky paid dearly for it at release.  Likely, they would've paid dearly prior to, but they weren't being crowdfunded.  As such, consumers had no exposure to defend until it was released.

    Sean Murray is case in point on why such managers need close oversight.  That cycle should not be repeated.  It's also not typical.

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.