Howdy, Stranger!

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

Foundry 42 Financials Released

1568101113

Comments

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 9,535
    NorseGod said:
    Erillion said:
    Funding of game titles:

    if first game of a new studio: investors and/or crowdfunding



    You forgot loans.

    So which has been more typical for new studios over the decades? How would you rank investors, loans, and crowdfunding as being most typical overall?
    Loan is for me just a variant of investor. Where the bank is the investor. Around here certain banks are infamous for grabbing and taking over any new businesses that stumble and have (even temporary) financial problems. 

    About your question. IMHO investors (direct or indirect via stock exchange) were typical for new studios. Only recently crowdfunding came to the fore as an alternative. With SC crowdfunding being an anomaly or role-model. Depends on who you ask.


    Have fun

    Gdemami
  • NorseGodNorseGod Member RarePosts: 1,833
    Erillion said:
    NorseGod said:
    Erillion said:

    Loan is for me just a variant of investor. Where the bank is the investor. Around here certain banks are infamous for grabbing and taking over any new businesses that stumble and have (even temporary) financial problems. 

    About your question. IMHO investors (direct or indirect via stock exchange) were typical for new studios. Only recently crowdfunding came to the fore as an alternative. With SC crowdfunding being an anomaly or role-model. Depends on who you ask.


    Have fun

    Pretty sure banks loan money to make money off of interest. If that business fails, then the bank sells whatever that business assets has to recoup their money by civil laws.

    I'm not sure how many new studios are publicly traded during startup.

    Do you think if CIG went public, things would be different, i.g. held accountable? 
    Come home, North Man.
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 9,535
    NorseGod said:
    Erillion said:
    NorseGod said:
    Erillion said:

    Loan is for me just a variant of investor. Where the bank is the investor. Around here certain banks are infamous for grabbing and taking over any new businesses that stumble and have (even temporary) financial problems. 

    About your question. IMHO investors (direct or indirect via stock exchange) were typical for new studios. Only recently crowdfunding came to the fore as an alternative. With SC crowdfunding being an anomaly or role-model. Depends on who you ask.


    Have fun

    Pretty sure banks loan money to make money off of interest. If that business fails, then the bank sells whatever that business assets has to recoup their money by civil laws.

    I'm not sure how many new studios are publicly traded during startup.

    Do you think if CIG went public, things would be different, i.g. held accountable? 
    I think that would depend on the legal situation of the country that  CIG would have chosen for the incorporation of their company .... and what type of company it would be. Some have to make their numbers public, others do not. 

    Have fun

    Gdemami
  • LazyDazedLazyDazed Member UncommonPosts: 146
    Here is a really good article breaking down a lot of financial information: https://www.space4games.com/en/star-citizen-en/star-citzen-squadron-42-financials/id-2826/
    Erillion
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,415
    All this money going to 'development' is semantics at best he and his cronies collecting 6 figure incomes the past 6 or 7 years accounts for a shit ton of money. Not to mention whatever else they claimed was 'development' but with no itemization or receipts we only have their (his) word to go by. And if anything the article point blank says the guy outright lied back when they were claiming SQ 42 was in a playable state.

    Article still written with and ironically (maybe not) the authors picture proves this out...rose colored glasses.
    BabuinixScot
  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member RarePosts: 2,554
    Despite the evidence,  that article is pinned on the 'If what CIG tells us is true....'.  Ignoring the ample evidence to the contrary.   Hopefully Roberts has to continue to seek bailouts to the point someone else takes over the project.  Or he sells out to Amazon, et al.

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 8,755
    LazyDazed said:
    Here is a really good article breaking down a lot of financial information: https://www.space4games.com/en/star-citizen-en/star-citzen-squadron-42-financials/id-2826/
    Site covers three games. Two of which are SC and SQ42.  They just started last year, I guess it will take a little while to add more. :neutral:
    sgel

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 10,707
    I just don’t understand how a single player game can take longer to create than 5 Star Wars films... and counting.
    Gdemami

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 3,794
    Despite the evidence,  that article is pinned on the 'If what CIG tells us is true....'.  Ignoring the ample evidence to the contrary.   Hopefully Roberts has to continue to seek bailouts to the point someone else takes over the project.  Or he sells out to Amazon, et al.
    If he sells out to amazon the worlds energy problems will be solved if we can harness the energy from the critics erupting in laughter as they point out history just repeated itself to all the white knights. 
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 3,794

    I just don’t understand how a single player game can take longer to create than 5 Star Wars films... and counting.
    I’ll save the usual suspects some time and answer for them.

    Those films were based on an existing franchise so everything was already in place. CIG had to be built from scratch and you just don’t understand game development. Also they suck and SQ42/SC is the saviour of all gaming.

    That should cover most of the usual responses
    NorseGod
  • justintbhsjustintbhs Member UncommonPosts: 21
    Kefo said:

    I just don’t understand how a single player game can take longer to create than 5 Star Wars films... and counting.
    I’ll save the usual suspects some time and answer for them.

    Those films were based on an existing franchise so everything was already in place. CIG had to be built from scratch and you just don’t understand game development. Also they suck and SQ42/SC is the saviour of all gaming.

    That should cover most of the usual responses
    Sums the usual responses up perfectly.
    NorseGod
  • VrikaVrika Member EpicPosts: 5,554
    I just don’t understand how a single player game can take longer to create than 5 Star Wars films... and counting.
    Folks pay to Disney to watch their films, therefore Disney employees are effective at creating films.

    Meanwhile folks pay CIG to develop Star Citizen. Therefore CIG employees are effective at keeping developing Star Citizen.
    MadFrenchie
     
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 2,120
    edited December 2018
    I just don’t understand how a single player game can take longer to create than 5 Star Wars films... and counting.
    My youngest one asked me something similar just the other day.

    I said him to go grab his light saber's toys and stage a fight with his brother while I recorded it with my phone. 1 minute after recording their jedi fighting shenanigans were playing in the living room telly and could be all over social media for everyone to see if I wanted too. 

    Now if I would want to make a game of my jedi kids fighting with lightsabers how much more work/time would I need to put into it before I could play it in my telly or share gameplay on youtube?

    In short, Movies are easy compared with games because they are passive entertainment.

    If that's not a simple enough to follow answer I suggest contacting any of the top developers like Rockstar, Blizzard, NaughtyDog, CDPR on why they take so much time doing their games when they already have established studios with huge amounts of resources and experience at their disposal from the get go.

    Red Dead Redemption 2 Required 8 Years And A Massive Team To Develop

    It's only natural that indie studios have the same problems with the added aggravation of well, being indie and starting from scratch.

    Why Do Independent Game Developers Take So Long To Make Games?


    So your question as an informed gamer should not be how video-games can take longer to create 5 movies but what is Disney waiting for releasing their Star Wars MMO Universe game or why do they keep paying EA/DICE to make their uninspired Battlefronts instead of making their own studio and produce a game worthy of such franchise. B)
    Post edited by Babuinix on
    ErillionGdemami
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited December 2018
    Babuinix said:
    I just don’t understand how a single player game can take longer to create than 5 Star Wars films... and counting.
    My youngest one asked me something similar just the other day.

    I said him go grab his light saber's toys and stage a fight with his brother while I recorded it with my phone. 1 minute after recording their jedi fighting shenanigans were playing in the living room telly and could be all over social media for everyone to see if I wanted too. 

    Now if I would want to make a game of my jedi kids fighting with lightsabers how much more work/time would I need to put into it before I could play it in my telly or share gameplay on youtube?

    In short, Movies are easy compared with games because they are passive entertainment.

    If that's not a simple enough to follow answer I suggest contacting any of the top developers like Rockstar, Blizzard, NaughtyDog, CDPR on why they take so much doing their games when they have huge amounts of resources and experience.

    Did you literally compare Star Wars movies to home videos?  In a genuine attempt at analogy?

    EDIT- also, a quick Google search shows 3.5 years development time for Witcher 3.  None of your post is acceptable evidence, quite frankly.

    image
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 2,120
    Cmon man you can't be that daft, even my kid got it lol

    Why do you think cinematics are shown years before the games come out? :D
    Gdemami
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 6,736
    I just don’t understand how a single player game can take longer to create than 5 Star Wars films... and counting.
    Games would by norm take longer to create than movies do, they also can be more expensive than movies on the AAA top-level budgets, mind RDR2 took 8 years until released and that was backed up by well-established and experienced studios in such type of game.

    So yeah, that's a thing you could understand.


  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    Babuinix said:
    Cmon man you can't be that daft, even my kid got it lol

    Why do you think cinematics are shown years before the games come out? :D
    You're the daft one trying to act like your home video analogy made any sense.  Yet again, you exaggerate to the point of uselessness in your crusade to refute any and all negative observations about your pet project.

    Your post was nonsense.

    image
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 6,736
    edited December 2018
    EDIT- also, a quick Google search shows 3.5 years development time for Witcher 3.  None of your post is acceptable evidence, quite frankly.
    One can bring RDR2, you can bring Witcher 3, one can bring Cyberpunk 2077, then you can bring another example, then one can bring Beyond Good and Evil 2.

    Wouldn't the point be  be "how can a single player game take longer than 5 SW movies" be that they simply can take that long due to each title own reality and development needs?
    Gdemami
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited December 2018
    MaxBacon said:
    EDIT- also, a quick Google search shows 3.5 years development time for Witcher 3.  None of your post is acceptable evidence, quite frankly.
    One can bring RDR2, you can bring Witcher 3, one can bring Cyberpunk 2077, then you can bring another example, then one can bring Beyond Good and Evil 2.

    Wouldn't the point be  be "how can a single player game take longer than 5 SW movies" be that they simply can take that long due to each title own reality and development needs?
    Sure, that's a valid point, but not one Babuinix was making.

    The more interesting discussion would be an analysis of how successful games are based on their development time.

    image
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 2,120
    Babuinix said:
    Cmon man you can't be that daft, even my kid got it lol

    Why do you think cinematics are shown years before the games come out? :D
    You're the daft one trying to act like your home video analogy made any sense.  Yet again, you exaggerate to the point of uselessness in your crusade to refute any and all negative observations about your pet project.

    Your post was nonsense.
    Sorry but I couldn't make it any simpler even if I tried. The point flew right over you, again.

    At least I tried I guess, that's more than what you contributed tbh.

    You could try and answer the question for the sake of the discussion.

    Why do you think cinematic traillers are showcased years before the games are released?

    You remeber remeber the first Cyberpunk trailer?

    Oh and to put The Witcher 3 production into account you have to understand that it's a culmination of years and years of iteration back from its early versions.

    Check how long how long it took witcher 1, then witcher 2 and then 3. 
    Why do you think the early ones took so much longert than the later one when they are clearly so inferior? Engine development, tools, manpower... 
    Gdemami
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 5,981
    The biggest factor in how long something takes to make is - usually - how many people are working on the task. Not just at the end but throughout the life of a project.

    There are phases of a project when fewer people are appropriate e.g. start up; concept and definition phase. There can be limits that might restrict how many people might be able to work at once e.g. size of office! There are things that can be done to improve efficiency e.g. multi-country working as well as things that make projects harder e.g. communication difficulties increase as teams get larger, you have more locations especially in different countries. And there are exceptions e.g. one author writing a book - although even then a team of researchers might help! 

    In general though the biggest factor it how long is how many people; which often comes down to budget / money. 
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 6,736
    edited December 2018
    gervaise1 said:
    The biggest factor in how long something takes to make is - usually - how many people are working on the task. Not just at the end but throughout the life of a project.

    In general though the biggest factor it how long is how many people; which often comes down to budget / money. 
    Not really...

    Otherwise, RDR2 would be have done ASAP and not in 8 years.

    The biggest factor in how long it takes is the development needs, if you go with a custom engine that will be most time and most expensive option, if you just build your game over one existing engine you can do it quickly enough.

    This is how you can have one game like Assassin's Creed IP literally every year, but you don't get one GTA or one Read Dead Redemption every year because they tend to develop a custom engine with new core technology jump on each new title.

    While more people do mean more resources, it all comes down to development needs that determine the time, and the budget with it.
    Gdemami
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,415
    Kefo said:

    I just don’t understand how a single player game can take longer to create than 5 Star Wars films... and counting.
    I’ll save the usual suspects some time and answer for them.

    Those films were based on an existing franchise so everything was already in place. CIG had to be built from scratch and you just don’t understand game development. Also they suck and SQ42/SC is the saviour of all gaming.

    That should cover most of the usual responses
    Stars Wars didnt have to build a new camera to shoot it is some super special way either....
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,415
    Babuinix said:
    I just don’t understand how a single player game can take longer to create than 5 Star Wars films... and counting.
    My youngest one asked me something similar just the other day.

    I said him go grab his light saber's toys and stage a fight with his brother while I recorded it with my phone. 1 minute after recording their jedi fighting shenanigans were playing in the living room telly and could be all over social media for everyone to see if I wanted too. 

    Now if I would want to make a game of my jedi kids fighting with lightsabers how much more work/time would I need to put into it before I could play it in my telly or share gameplay on youtube?

    In short, Movies are easy compared with games because they are passive entertainment.

    If that's not a simple enough to follow answer I suggest contacting any of the top developers like Rockstar, Blizzard, NaughtyDog, CDPR on why they take so much doing their games when they have huge amounts of resources and experience.

    Did you literally compare Star Wars movies to home videos?  In a genuine attempt at analogy?

    EDIT- also, a quick Google search shows 3.5 years development time for Witcher 3.  None of your post is acceptable evidence, quite frankly.
    he didnt have kids when this started but theyll probably have kids before (if) it ever releases
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,415
    MaxBacon said:
    gervaise1 said:
    The biggest factor in how long something takes to make is - usually - how many people are working on the task. Not just at the end but throughout the life of a project.

    In general though the biggest factor it how long is how many people; which often comes down to budget / money. 
    Not really...

    Otherwise, RDR2 would be have done ASAP and not in 8 years.

    The biggest factor in how long it takes is the development needs, if you go with a custom engine that will be most time and most expensive option, if you just build your game over one existing engine you can do it quickly enough.

    This is how you can have one game like Assassin's Creed IP literally every year, but you don't get one GTA or one Read Dead Redemption every year because they tend to develop a custom engine with new core technology jump on each new title.

    While more people do mean more resources, it all comes down to development needs that determine the time, and the budget with it.
    I can just about guarantee you it took that long because they shelved it so they could milk and monetize every penny out of GTA V. Why compete against yourself if you dont have to?
Sign In or Register to comment.